owning the printing press vs freedom of speech

Okay, I had previously discussed how a corporation cannot be entrusted to protect free speech.

I think this is at least slightly a misnomer.  If one accepts theories on the free market (and if we even live in a free market)-then if one company denied you service you would be able to go to another company.  No shoes, no shirt, no service, oh well a five star restaurant won’t serve you, no problemo brah, there’s still that taco stand a block from the beach.  When condescending Milo Y was booted off twitter, I maintained that it wasn’t a freedom of speech issue.  At the time, he still had a platform at Breitbart.  However, what I may have failed to realize was that he lost one platform and the free market hadn’t provided a directly competing platform that he could just hop on.  Unfortunately, tech companies who have at best, arbitrary TOS’s control the infrastructures of how we share information.   Tech companies are ISP’s, domain registrars and other pieces of the information superhighway. So we literally have a situation while not directly controlling free speech, they own the pieces of the online printing press that is used to distribute said free speech.

It’s funny, because when I read 1984, I thought that it was about the NSA.  However, it’s looking more and more like dystopic sci fi movies where corrupt corporations have too much power and too little ethics….

Funny how all those right wing libertarian tough guys got it all wrong…

the unpersoning of little andrew anglin…

so by now, you have probably heard about the Daily Stormer being taken off the internet.

I don’t like Nazi’s but I don’t like censorship either…

I personally find the cat and mouse game between a screwball nazi troll and crooked tech companies to be quite entertaining.

Daily Stormer reared it’s ugly little head a few times as:




(and I am sure I am forgetting or just didn’t know about a few other versions…)

Now the king of trolls has a blog:


I am going to be quoting a few sections from his blog, partially because I find it entertaining and partially because I think there is a high likelyhood it will be taken down and this might become some kind of “resource.”

“The fact of the matter is that I was banned from the internet for a joke, that while being obviously offensive, was nothing more or less than a joke.

Although explaining a joke kills the fun of it, I think at this point, this having become one of the most infamous jokes in history – and a joke which has in fact altered history – I can go ahead and explain it.

We have a culture of outrage. The direction of our society is determined by who can become the most offended, and make the most noise about how offended they are. I have a belief, which is supported by logic and data which I may present on this personal blog at a later date, that this outrage culture is not only ridiculous, but sociologically unsustainable.”

“As an actual human being, I do not resemble the character of Andrew Anglin which, with the enthusiastic assistance of the media and groups such as the SPLC, I have created for the Daily Stormer.

A big part of what I do with the Andrew Anglin character on the Daily Stormer is trigger the outrage culture, in order to expose the fundamentally flawed nature of it, as well as to draw attention to myself and my agenda, which would otherwise simply be ignored. That certainly worked with the Heather Heyer piece.”

Direct link:




The funny thing, with all his nazibopi machismo, the images he uses are far less racist than what man hating feminist Amanda Marcotte used in her awful book.

Another thing, for all his whining about muh freedumb of speach, he doesn’t seem to be letting comments through.  Ironic, those libertarian tough guys, eh?

This is what street harassment looks like

…no, not some made up story on Hollaback  about some man hating feminist crying that a low status man crossed her path or stinky Lauren Southern complaining that even though she was dressed like a tramp, the only dark skinned man who would give her the time of day was Roosh V….

…the real kind…

lunatic Alex Jones, watch out, if you keep on pestering people, you might get punched like lispy Dickie Spencer….

Did he actually say “anti-liberal?”  Are you know a closet Hillary supporter, Alex? Don’t look like those “male enhancement” pills are working…

The Alt-Right Isn’t Fighting a Fair Fight

Okay, I did not see the complete video but I watched this snippet which is on an Alt-Right Youtube channel and presumably edited to make Dickie Spencer look good…

Notice how Spencer calls “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Hapiness” faggy.  Oh, the hipster irony is strong with this one.  So, Spencer is pretty much renouncing “enlightenment” values and even libertarian values-Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Notice what happened a little while back when Trickly Dickie was punched.  All these Alt-Righters said it was awful that he was punched for being on the street and spewing unpopular ideas.  Well, it is actually enlightenment values and the constitution that guarantees him the right for free speech.  Do you think that if he was in power, he would grant you the same freedoms?  Alt-Righters seem to demand free speech and freedom from violence when espousing their ideas, yet it is highly unlikely they would grant this freedom to their opponents if  the had the option.

Why is this significant?  He demands that he be granted the right to free speech and protection from violence.  Yet, he would not grant the same to you.  He is playing from a different playbook.  It is comparable to a feminist demanding “equality” then demanding to be placed first on a life raft when the boat starts sinking.  These people have shown themselves unworthy of debate but they must also aggressively be resisted….

OMG, Did Metallica Disown the Alt-Reich

For the libertarian tough guys, how can you not like this???


I stumbled upon this Metallica Video:


And it looks like they say it (or some variation) every show now…

uh, oh, I guess Dickie Spencer and Jagoff Donovan will not be listening to any Metallica anytime soon…



Can you trust a corporation for free speech?

By now you are probably hearing about Net Neutrality.

We have seen Milo Y rant about his free speech being limited on Twitter.

Apparently, the philosopher patriarch Jordan Peterson had some trouble with his Youtube account.

Here is an interesting video:


At one point when I was floating around on the edges of “MGTOW” spaces, someone suggested I start a Youtube channel.  I resisted the idea for a couple of reasons.  It could increase the likelyhood that I might be doxxed (as if I am even worth doxxing anyways.) I felt that I wouldn’t be able to convey my ideas as effectively in a spoken word format or a “podcast” format.  I felt that Youtube (along with Twitter) was a place to oversimplify ideas.  For example, “reaction videos” were less effective (or perhaps more effective if you are a fast talker) than distilling ideas via written word.  I do feel though that Youtube can be effective for showing hot to do a say, a basic guitar repair and be more effective than an article.  However, the most important reason was that a corporation was now in control of your content.  Now if you were to be blocked, perhaps you could move over to Vimeo but how many viewers would migrate with you?  And if you were expecting revenue from Youtube, well you are now starting from scratch.  Sure, using a blog host like wordpress could potentially have similar issues, but it would be a bit easier to start over on, say blogspot.  And self hosting is an option that isn’t readily available for video content.  Those libertarian tough guys, er, I mean MGTOW’s seemed awfully trusting of a corporation to host their “controversial” content.  The corporation can shut the water off for virtually any reason.  So the question becomes how do you find decentralized methods for sharing information?  I know the technology exists and it would essentially be peer-to-peer networks ala Napster where data could be transferred.  But the question becomes, were would online denizen’s meet before they decided to “decentralize?”  I’m surprised the  MGTOW guys haven’t discussed this before.  Maybe they were too busy being tough guys and not really going their own way.  Alright, I’m just taking cheap shots now….