<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" ?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" href="https://www.earthli.com/resources/styles/atom.css" ?><feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <generator uri="https://www.earthli.com/news/" version="3.7">
    earthli News 3.7
  </generator>
    <title type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[Arbitrary Thoughts &gt; earthli News 3.7]]>
  </title>
  <id>https://www.earthli.com/news/</id>
  <link rel="self" href="https://www.earthli.com/news/view_folder_rss.php?content=text&amp;format=atom&amp;id=46"/>
  <updated>2023-12-30T11:06:26+01:00</updated>
  <icon>https://www.earthli.com/news/icons/webcore_png/app/news_100px.png</icon>
    <subtitle type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[]]>
  </subtitle>
    <rights type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[Copyright (c) 1999-2026 earthli.com. All Rights Reserved.]]>
  </rights>
  <entry>
      <title type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[Not "right wing" but "unbiased"]]>
  </title>
    <id>https://www.earthli.com/news/view_article.php?id=4789</id>
    <link href="https://www.earthli.com/news/view_article.php?id=4789"/>
    <updated>2023-12-28T18:18:10+01:00</updated>
    <author>
        <name type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[Marco von Ballmoos]]>
  </name>
      <uri>https://earthli.com/users/marco</uri>
    </author>
      <summary type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[People like to call providers/platforms like Substack and Rumble "right
wing", when what they really are is that they are "unbiased". These
platforms don't ban casters for having the wrong views or for saying the
wrong things. They therefore end up having the casters that other
platforms have...
]]>
  </summary>
      <content type="text" xml:lang="en-us">
    <![CDATA[Published by marco on 28. Dec 2023 18:18:10
Updated by marco on 30. Dec 2023 11:06:26
------------------------------------------------------------------------

People like to call providers/platforms like Substack and Rumble "right wing",
when what they really are is that they are "unbiased". These platforms don't ban
casters for having the wrong views or for saying the wrong things. They
therefore end up having the casters that other platforms have banned. Since
those platforms constantly designate themselves as "left wing", the people who
they ban are, de facto, "right wing", even if they are self-evidently not.

Look, some of them are, but almost all of them are most definitely not. There
are only a handful of really vile sites that I've seen pointed out. Most of them
have zero audience. The danger is, of course, that they won't stop at banning
outright Nazis. They never do. Not once they get a whiff of power.

And it's always the dumbest, most basic, most kowtowing-to-power of opinions who
get to choose who to ban. They're servants of power and don't even realize it.
Just painfully basic -- and utterly unaware of the fact.

Once they've managed to ban everyone with an opinion that you don't like, then
you can freely call them all the "neofascist and authoritarian right". Any
platform that does host them is therefore also, by definition, fascist.

Nazi even. 

Why not? You're in control of the narrative. Go nuts. 

Where are they going to complain? Not on your platforms! 🖕

They can go ahead and post on their little Nazi platforms as long as they can --
until we get them, my pretty, and their little dogs, too.

Case in point is this fool I've been following for decades, who occasionally
posts some neat cultural stuff [1], just looks goddamned stupid every time he
reminds me of how basic his politics are. The post "Substack Turns On Its
‘Nazis Welcome!’ Sign." by Jason Kottke
<https://kottke.org/23/12/0043684-substack-turns-on-its-naz> references the
sure-to-be-scintillating analysis in the "article" "Substack Turns On Its
‘Nazis Welcome!’ Sign" by Mike Masnick
<https://www.techdirt.com/2023/12/26/substack-turns-on-its-nazis-welcome-sign/>.
Jason thinks this citation is pithy, not noticing the irony.

"The key point: your reputation as a private site is what you allow. If you
allow garbage, you’re a garbage site. If you allow Nazis, you’re a Nazi
site."

Jason's is not a Nazi site, but it's slowly becoming a garbage, /r/politics,
libtard, woke-ass, basic site. He's now referencing TechDirt for insights into
what it even means to support free expression, to run a business that hosts web
sites without endorsing those web sites. Being a Nazi is not illegal. Hosting
their web site does not enable them any more than hosting fucking TechDirt
enables lowbrow, manipulative, censorious, and outright fascist, straight-up,
unironically 1984-style opinions about what constitutes thoughtcrime.

And you know what's neat? It never, ever, ever -- not once -- occurs to them
that some of us might take offense to the platforming of most of them! You know,
the thought leaders that brought us the Iraq War, that brought us the financial
crisis, that brought us the disinformation boondoggle of the COVID years -- oh,
yeah, they're still so smugly in denial about having mad a single misstep there
-- and about fucking Russiagate.

They cannot shut up about the "nonsense peddlers preying on the most gullible
people to get their subscriptions", but they only point to certain nonsense
peddlers, the ones that offend them. The nonsense peddlers that agree with them?
Why ... those are invisible! Of course, they get to keep their platforms. Of
course they get to fail upward! They're friends! They're fellow travelers! We
all went to school together!

[image]Thomas Friedman still has a job. He has a huge platform. His opinion has
caused more damage than we can ever know. No-one -- no-one who matters in the
liberal, elite world -- has ever talked about de-platforming his ass. The entire
stable of opinion writers at the New York Times is full of deranged,
warmongering lunatics who dress themselves up as liberals.

But they've pulled off the grand trick of getting their hordes of slavering,
unquestioning, basic lunatics to attack the comparatively tiny Substack. All of
Substack doesn't have a tenth of the reach of the New York Times. The handful of
offensive sites on Substack is about 1‰ of even Substack's content. And yet, I
can't stop hearing about it.

No-one talks about the literal piles of misinformation coming from the
mainstream media. While it's barely started writing in any honest way about the
Israel conflict, it can't bring itself to be at-all honest about the dumpster
fire that is the Biden administration, nor what a boondoggle of death they
supported in the Ukraine war.

All of these people -- who've never seen a war they didn't absolutely love,
who've never seen a self-enriching scam that they didn't absolutely love --
still have their platforms. No-one's clamoring for them to lose their platforms,
but they get to send their minions on a hunt for Nazis. And those foolish
minions think that they're all doing the Lord's work. You can't make this stuff
up.

Once you give into them on eliminating outright Nazi content -- you know, with
actual Hakenkreuz logos and shit -- they'll line right up and start ordering you
to ban what they consider to be Nazi-adjacent content. Pretty soon, you'll have
all of the people who fled the mainstream media take to their heels again as
these self-selected and unbearably smug Elect manage to impose their will on yet
another corner of the Internet.

Kottke probably doesn't even realize what a fucking tool of these Elites he is,
with his mindless regurgitation of "ban the Nazis". Please. Have you actually
visited one of these sites? I visited a couple. The one that had been updated
most recently hadn't been updated since Februrary (10 months ago). There are, I
believe, sixteen sites that might be considered Nazi sites. And they all have
what amounts to zero traffic. [2]

And these liberal fucking fascists still have to ride Substack about it, not
realizing that it's going to blow right back in their faces when people get sick
of being told what they can and cannot read. We are talking about grown fucking
adults here. We are talking about web sites that no-one visits because they
suck. The problem has solved itself.

This hysteria is exactly how the right-wing stirs itself up with drag queens at
story hour. This furor about those dangerous Nazis that still lurk online are
the exact liberal equivalent. They just all love to censor. They just all love
to tell everybody else what to do.

Land of the free, my ass. [3] None of you dipshits would know freedom if it bit
you in the ass. You're all on the intellectual level of hall monitors, eternally
asking people for their hall passes and glorying in the power of turning them
down and sending them back where they came from.

Even if you don't care about the principle -- which I'm sure most of you don't
-- what about self-preservation? Don't you realize that it will be your sites
that might be banned when the tide turns? Don't you realize that there is no end
to banning stuff? That stuff you like will be banned when you're no longer in
charge? It's far better to have a world where Thomas Friedman keep writing his
little essays than to have a world where someone decided that he can't.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[1] Although I have to say that his vacation replacement Edith Zimmerman was an
    absolute breath of fresh air. When his basic ass returned, it was a bit
    disappointing. I still follow the RSS feed, but I'm tempted to drop it. I
    barely read anything he posts anymore.


[1] See "Washington Post Op-Ed Argues That Colleges Should 'Restrict' Speech To
    Fight Antisemitism" by Emma Camp
    <https://reason.com/2023/12/12/washington-post-op-ed-argues-that-colleges-should-restrict-speech-to-fight-antisemitism/>
    for more information.


[1] Kottke even lives in Vermont, one of those hardscrabble, Yankee states that
    prides itself on its freedoms. Its neighbor New Hampshire has the state
    motto "Live Free or Die".

]]>
  </content>
  </entry>
</feed>
