Info Wars Taken Down

in politics •  6 years ago 

firefox_2018-08-06_12-33-11.png

Here it is, at long last. I want to give my thoughts on how incredible this is.

Info Wars has an extensive history of attacking the victims of legitimate crimes and tragedies, such as Sandy Hook, for instance, peddling obscenely fake news stories, and putting the lives of millions at risk when you factor that Trump and Jones are buddies. They need to be exterminated. This is the free market of the internet, and that free market decided and will continue to decide that we don't want your stupid fucking garbage poisoning anyone else.

I used to think Info Wars was a joke, but I've met people who actually got brainwashed by them, and people who know people who were brainwashed, and if you """joke""" 100% of the time and your """jokes""" involve the murder and destruction of society, you need to step off. Good riddance.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I am not a fan of jones, but I dont think this is the correct answer.

I agree that these companies have a right to take this step. But I dont want my news prefiltered by somebody else. I want to gain the news according to MY own choices. For this reason I have long left facebook and the likes.

I hope this can be another weak up call and more people will move to decentralised and censorship free platforms instead of being being manipulated by facebook.

You should always get news from multiple sources regardless, companies and corporations can't control that either way.

Yes they cant control us, but dont be fooled. Most people do not care and just get their news on facebook. These can be controlled very easily.

Privacy and freedom of information should not be something you have to actively manage. Our systems should be private and open by default.

normally I would not even care how misinformed large parts of the population are, but we live in a democracy, where the stupidity of people becomes a weapon to control us.

My reasoning for liking AJ being shunned of mainstream social media is specifically because most people don't fact check and source check. He has literally ruined the lives of personal friends and family with his brainwashing garbage. I don't trust the "tech giants" to make these decisions at all, but in this very specific case, I think it's more good than harm. He is a monster and 'normal' people shouldn't be able to find him.

Maybe there are cases where censorship brings positive results. But that is a dangerous slippery slope. Maybe there are also cases where discrimination brings some short term positive effects?

In the end I am not at all convinced that a political censoring facebook is adding something good to the world and I think in the end we will pay a higher price for it.

to conflate censorship with the current situation is bogus IMO. He isn't "being censored", he is being removed for telling his fanbase to kill people. He violated a contract he signed, plain and simple. It's now about what he says and thinks, it's about how he communicates it to his audience.

yes censorship may be too strong of a word. The problem is that these rules are not enforced in other cases and it always ends up being a case by case decision. This means that there is room for interpretation and thus the possibility to influence public opinion.

What is really confusing to me is that all platforms have taken this step at the same time. It means that it is very probable that they have coordinated it which means that the decision was not independently based on the terms of service.

I totally agree, the way things are enforced is out of whack, without a doubt. The "collusion" I think is funny, people are claiming it's like a sign of the end of the world or something, but I don't really think so.

So @cyberdemon531 you say " He has literally ruined the lives of personal friends and family with his brainwashing garbage." are you sure this is true ?? Can you prove that Alex Jones has done this really ??

He tells his severely right-wing audience to kill queer people, that's a good place to start.

prove that statement, i am sorry but i am pretty sure he has not said that !1 give me a link to this accusation you make !!

"He is a monster and 'normal' people shouldn't be able to find him." so who do you decide @cyberdemon531 who are the normal people and that should be " protected " from Jones ?? Are you normal ?? Are your friends and family normal ?? How do you know ?? Who judges ?? You ?? Your friends ??

We, the collective people of society.

Oh so YOU are the collective majority now ?? Since when ?? Did you decide that, when was it voted and by who ??

We, the collective people of society (1).

Only that you did not make that decision.

You personally (I hope :) ) did not do it.
Then you could say it was we as in we the voters, or we the people. But I dont think there was any serious debate about social media censorship prior to the elections.

That menas that some people made the decision without direct democratic legitimisation. Maybe they can claim an indirect legitimacy, I dont know that because I dont know to which degree the state is involved in this.

@gomeravibz points out the problem. Any decision taken will be arbitrary to some degree. There are so many questions now that need to be answered regarding future cases. Otherwise we find ourselves in a system of censorship where people can be censored not following strict open rules, but based on random criteria. From there it is only one more step to silencing opposition as desired.

Once you create a central authority you need to make sure that authority is kept in control. And it rarely is. Central authority is a major weak point for failure and corruption. In the end I believe that it is best if these central points of control do not exist at all.

the irony here being that 90% of society hates cyberdemon
keep being a racist shithead tho (according to society) because society is always correct and infallible

Although I don't feel completely at ease with the precedent this sets I've got to say this is "censorship" at its best. Info wars targets the mentally vulnerable and tries to infect them with the sort of paranoid delusions which will leave them chemically addicted to red pills. They're guilty of cult-like behavior.

I think they've been given enough warnings and too much understanding over all, and they should go somewhere else. They can still freely exist without tying themselves to the platforms they did.

All this did was magnify the power of every red pill by 100x and make it so the frogs really were gay the entire time "I told you so, the frogs are super gay now!"

The crazy cultists are going to believe what they want whether or not AJ & Friends are on mainstream platforms, but their attempts to attack the weaker minded are thwarted. My support for a person's existence ends when they start preaching violence and murder and tell their cultists to kill and attack innocent people (like he has done in regards to sandy hook recently).

And yet again, the trenches dig deeper...

I may not like Alex, I laughed when 4chan called en masse and he had his meltdown, but...I see so many people called out as "bad actors" when they're misguided, even a little bit. This is only going to escalate the issues currently present. I find myself increasingly agreeing with this post, even though I just read it this morning: https://www.steemit.com/@artisticscreech/oppressive-division

Alex Jones is literally suing the parents of Sandy Hook murder victims. He isn't just a "misguided bad actor" he is a heinous and evil villain of the people who needs to be exterminated everywhere he pops up. This isn't just a "disagreement".

I'm well aware of the idiocy he peddles. I've got a coworker who's obsessed with the guy. My concern is that he's going to use this to justify worse things.

This just made him 10 times stronger.

He can use whatever he wants as long as it isn't anywhere I can see it.

I hate to break it to you but hes probably going to end up on steemit now. Dtube or DLive possibly. Hes going to probably cause this place to explode.

If I had to hazard a guess, he's probably going to go to bitchute first. I thought I heard somewhere that he thinks the cryptocurrencies are a NWO plot.

Could be wrong, though.

HA! A crypto based platform would make him unstoppable. But oh well, he is a dumb ass boomer so maybe this is for the best.

He can if he wants, it'll probably make the steem price go up so it's worth it haha

It will make the steem price go up for sure. It will also make him insanely powerful on this platform. If someone like that combined with crypto in a way where he can curate and reward his followers for saying and doing what he wants the man might as well be a fucking god. Crypto is a religion as it is.

For people who don't like Alex Jones this was the dumbest thing that could have been done period.

Oh yeah it'd be scary for sure, but I disagree it was the dumbest thing to do. He signed a contract and violated the terms of the contract, if people have been getting banned for years for the same stuff, he shouldn't get away with it because he's AJ.

He can use whatever he wants as long as it isn't anywhere I can see it.

So compromising you own principles for some extra money is a more than acceptable position, for yourself...?

Moral compass , anyone?

My favorite moral compass is the one that tells me violence and murder against minorities is cool because freeze peach. Back me up, dude.

He can use whatever he wants as long as it isn't anywhere I can see it.

So compromising you own principles for some extra money is a more than acceptable position, for yourself...?

Moral compass , anyone?

the thing is cyberdemon never had any principle or ideals, it's all just influenced by whomever gives her positive attention.

Most people wait until they're popular before making it obvious they're just in it for the money, but we're dealing with an incompetent brat here.

You could just not watch. Authoritarian child.

Him brainwashing people into being criminals has nothing to do with me watching him, but ok.

"He can use whatever he wants as long as it isn't anywhere I can see it." - @cyberdemon531

That's how shit gets banned in a free society. My feelz.

cool

what's wrong with brainwashing?

It's quite enjoyable actually.

..you don't have to look - that's the beauty of freeodom..

It's not about me, it's about brainwashing.

So you are saying the that lower IQ than yourself - in others - means they do no have the intelligence or right to pick for themselves?
.... and you feel you have the right to decide for them?

Yup, the Stalin picture still fits..

If you want to write more fan-fiction please make a new post on your blog so I can re-steem it.

When you want to control others "for their own good", freedom takes a backseat.

Sandy Hook is a croc of Lies and you know it !! False Flag !! Most of the kids shown in the photos being represented as being the victims turned out to be child actors and are still alive and were even seen at the beginning of the superbowl awhile back !

Are you joking or are you legitimately insane?

to use one of your lines " lol " !

I only speak English, so if you want to continue this conversation I'd recommend finding a translator to speak to me.

I thought you didn't like brainwashing? Why is government brainwashing ok, but a medium sized celebrity brainwashing you not ok?

again, so you don't want legitimate disussion? what's the point of making a steemit blog when this could have been a tweet? Oh yeah, that's right, to cash in on current events with clickbait. oh please, 800 characters vs. my non comprehensive 5000 characters makes you look like you're just hiding the posts because I showed you up on your own blog. Anyone checking this, check out my blog in the last downvoted comment!

edit: interesting that you would rescind the downvotes, very amusing dear. But care to acutally contribute or is your brain too small?

you've got no power in downvoting me bud, I don't care about monetary gain, nor do I care about social clout. You're really just making yourself look stupid by doing this.

lol I already knew you would flag me down. Genuinely pretty pathetic when you complained about a anti self-voter bot and some steemit witness doing it to you only a few months ago. Now what could be the legitimate reason?

Disagreement on rewards
nope I have no rewards
Fraud or Plagiarism
nope, original content
Hate Speech or Internet Trolling
nope. or is my name hate speech?
Intentional miss-categorized content or Spam
nah it's on topic

Interesting to know you can't put aside pettyness to have a discussion on a topic. Who is more mature here?

I wish I could downvote you until you disappeared from the internet, but nope I have to bear all the pain that your existance brings me.

Oh great, another 2 paragraph shallow review on a subject matter cyberdemon has very little grasp on.
Mostly what I'm seeing here is projection, I don't think infowars ever said that they were joking, but it was kind of you to put that projection in there for them. At most you could say entertainment, which is one good way to captivate someone (very LOL when making this statement on your blog). You can restrict speech as much as you want, but someone will always find ways to circumvent that, even if they have to talk in code or even something as simple as subtle eye movements. Forcing the issue underground only breeds further resentment and increases extreme reaction (making death threats more likely to become an actual reality rather than a meme or just general harassment)

However the real issue here is the monopolistic nature of these companies and the increasing control they have over communiqué. Sure you may view this act as some kind of victory (as hollow as it is), but these corporations are NOT your friends. They do NOT have your interests in mind. They do NOT have ideals except making money. They will turn sides on a dime when it is convenient for them to do so, why? Because they already have the power to do so, you couldn't stop them if you tried. If twitter wanted to print "burn all faggots" on every page then they could do so easily, but it's not in their interest to do so, the same for the inverse (just think of one that isn't mild). The interesting thing about these platforms is that they all originally had much more freedom; youtube for instance, it bought a lot of laughs when two youtubers would go back and forth between each other, making the next video to fuel whatever petty war they had, in general nobody gave a fuck. But youtube around 2010 tried to put a stop to that, you couldn't name names anymore or else your channel would get owned; of course people just stepped around that by being more non-specific or passive aggressive. Twitter specifically was very pro-freespeech and pro-privacy when it was newly a thing, I believe I remember a newspaper article comparing various platforms around 10 years ago and twitter was rated as one of the highest for both those things; now twitter is one of the very few websites that doesn't allow you to use a VPN (god forbid you're a whistle blower and want to get important information out to an audience without the risk of getting killed), combine that with people who just bot followers to get fake popularity and it just looks pedantic. Facebook I'll admit to never using, but I imagine in the early days when it was just for college students it was mostly unmoderated.(feel free to corrrect on that one). Apple and spotify? I'm not really sure why alex jones is on a music store (guessing he has some dumb songs about muh frogs turning gay), but collusion between large corporations is very illegal, they could have been more subtle about it too, at least space it out a bit or something, but does anyone have the money to sue them? Not really, they're not accountable for anything they do. Again, none of them have your interests at heart... this isn't a positive thing in the slightest. It's easy to back something when it destroys your enemies, but what if it gets turned back on you? Funny enough, either in the comments or where ever I'm seeing a lot of left wing people or lgbt saying they get targeted by twitter takedowns far more than right wing people. This one's a hard one to gauge since I believe there's currently bots that auto suspend twitter accounts these days? Either way I'm sure both sides report each other, maybe one side is more savvy with abusing the system? But that's for small timers, with big ones it's much harder to get rid of them because reports are subject to more scrutiny and being in the majority of the public eye means it can be bad for PR if someone big suddenly disappears off their site (again, twitter does NOT care about you or anyone but themselves!)

Now before you put words in my mouth, I never said freespeech was for everywhere and every place. Obviously you don't go shouting in your mother's face "you're a fucking faggot!" 20 times a day(or maybe you do? hehe), if you did that she would slap you in the face, that would be the consequence (no need for interferance from the state) and the end of the matter. However, all of these mentioned services are platforms, you know, platforms for self expression? What's the point in the website if it's just used to reinforce one viewpoint? I can just do the same thing by asking my friends to agree with me without any need to waste internet bandwidth.

Another funny thing I saw about you, is referring to many users of this steemit service as "cringe libertarians". Almost as if you intend to remove that sort of person and subvert steemit in general. Here's an idea, why don't you make your own platform you're fully in control of and see how it takes off? tech equivalent of "beat my time" ( you won't tho =D )

They need to be exterminated.

...So you think the extermination of a person

is an appropriate response to disliking words that come out of someone's mouth?

Stalin would love you..

...Free speech anyone?

Anyone who incites violence, murder, and hatred toward the oppressed and minorities needs to go away and shouldn't be given a platform. Go cry about your frozen peaches elsewhere, buddy.

Anyone who incites violence, murder, and hatred toward the oppressed and minorities needs to go away

...but that's just exactly what you did by saying they need to me exterminated...?

The logic is non existent in this one...
Peaches are nice...

The channels, bud. Info Wars.

.....and putting the lives of millions at risk when you factor that Trump and Jones are buddies. They need to be exterminated.

Neither Jones or Trump are channels, they are individuals.
By mentioning individuals names and not channels, the sentence refers to individuals, and not channels..

Jones tells Trump, the president, his murderous garbage. That's horrifying and that link needs to be cut. Problem?

Diverting away from the point doesn't really work with me...

Is your mistake to write concisely the problem ... 'exterminating individuals'_?
Or do you actually advocate exterminating individuals?

lol