"If you don't like it, start your own!" - The Bootlicker Argument

in censorship •  10 months ago 

As most of us are aware, there’s been a culling of sorts on the internet lately.

A purge, you could rightly say.

Many notable accounts have been removed from various social media platforms, and these social media corporate monopolies like Facebook and YouTube have been behaving like they’re straight out of a fascist wet dream.

The most notable casualty in this information war is Alex Jones.


Because there are so many people being abused by these monopolies in big tech that it would take weeks to go over them all, I’ll just focus on Jones because he’s the biggest name around and he’s clearly being used as a catalyst for the next-level censorship programs.

This has been a real shit-show. So much so that I’m not sure where to start to begin making my argument.

What I think is the heart of the matter is that the banning of Alex Jones from these platforms has created what will probably be one of the biggest Streisand Effects in history.

The Streisand effect is a phenomenon whereby an attempt to hide, remove, or censor a piece of information has the unintended consequence of publicizing the information more widely, usually facilitated by the Internet. It is an example of psychological reactance, wherein once people are aware that some information is being kept from them, their motivation to access and spread it is increased.


What happened to Alex Jones is he was banned off of Facebook, YouTube, Spotify, and Apple iTunes within a 12 hour period on Sunday night/Monday morning, and then multiple other platforms AND internet utilities have sequentially banned him since then.

YouTube, Apple and Facebook Ban Infowars, Which Decries 'Mega Purge'

The reasons that all these platforms state for banning him are very vague, to say the least. The sort of thing you would WANT to see are a list of posts or video clips, in context, that demonstrate how content has fallen under the reported categories that make it worthy for banning, such as “hate speech” and “inciting violence”.

Here’s a simple series of tweets of me simply requesting that someone prove claims that they’ve made about this, because I see the exact same claim made constantly and NEVER (repeat: NEVER EVER EVER EVER) does anyone back them up.

Screen Shot 2018-08-10 at 5.57.38 AM.png

I remember the good old days when there was something called the Burden of Proof:

The term "burden of proof" is used to mean two kinds of burdens: The burden of production (or the burden of "going forward with the evidence") and the burden of persuasion.

Barron's Law Dictionary, pp. 55-56 (2nd ed. 1984); Black's Law Dictionary, p. 178 (5th ed. 1979).

Clearly, this means that if you make a claim, it is your responsibility to either produce evidence to justify the claim or to be persuasive in your argument.

Blaming other people because you don’t want to accept that burden is not an excuse, and it’s not an argument. It means you’re wrong and probably haven’t looked into the claim enough to even prove it to yourself but you were persuaded anyway because it feels good or fits your narrative.

Leftists, who have for a long time been anti-cooperation and anti-business to the point that they would want to legally force bakers to bake cakes they don’t want to bake, are now suddenly everywhere saying “muh private company can ban whoever it wants!”

It’s ironic how these leftists become supporters of monopolistic corporations when it suits their narrative. Funny... Not really.

The biggest problem with the “muh private corporation” argument is that on many levels, these corporations are NOT private, they are quasi-private at best. They make deals with the government, they work alongside each other, they provide intelligence and records to each other, and in many cases they are directly influenced by each other.

A few weeks ago members of Congress directly, publically, put pressure on these platforms to remove Alex Jones:

There’s one of these with another congressman regarding Twitter and Facebook as well, but such clips are getting harder and harder to find.

The point is that members of Congress pressured the big tech platforms to remove Alex Jones, and then a few weeks later THEY ALL DID IT WITHIN A 12 HOUR PERIOD.

If that doesn’t smell fishy to you, I don’t know what would.

Not to mention that the mainstream media, CNN especially, is directly involved in these tech platforms banning Alex Jones.

If you simply search “Alex Jones” on Google you can see that they’re still at it, harder than ever now because they smell blood in the water:

Screen Shot 2018-08-10 at 6.16.25 AM.png

Now, it’s one thing to remove someone from a platform for what they say publicly. It is QUITE ANOTHER THING when MailChimp bans people.

If you’re not familiar with MailChimp, it’s basically a newsletter service. It keeps a list of email addresses and users can compose emails and send them to the addresses on that list. Well, MailChimp removed Alex, too, which is a big deal to me because this goes well beyond the “muh private company” argument because a newsletter IS the other option.

See, the big tech platforms are a monopoly: if you get kicked off of one, there really isn’t a comparable competitor to take you. In this case, the newsletter WAS the backup plan so that people could still get updates on what Alex Jones and InfoWars is doing. But they removed that option from him.

MailChimp bans Alex Jones for hateful conduct

As a web developer, this worries me deeply.

It makes me think about people being banned off of essential services like email, or even operating systems like Windows or Sierra.

What would happen if Microsoft suddenly decided that they didn’t like what you were saying - not that it was illegal, but that they just didn’t like it - and they shut off your Windows account on your laptop.

Think something like that wouldn’t happen?

Well, look at what Gab has been going through:

Screen Shot 2018-08-10 at 6.24.36 AM.png

Gab is a self-described free speech competitor to Twitter. You know when people say “If you don’t like it, START YOUR OWN!”? Well, this is the “your own” that’s been started. And it looks like these free speech alternatives can be kicked off of their servers because of the SPEECH OF THE USERS OF THE SITE.


This means that bad actors who WANT to get the site shut down can create sock accounts and start posting death threats and incitements to violence and then REPORT THEIR OWN POSTS to Azure to get Gab shut down.

Because of this, Gab has run a fundraising campaign to attempt to set up their own system, but, honestly, I have doubts that THAT option will even be free of this kind of totalitarian unpersoning.

This is for sure the scariest time in society that I can remember. This is fascism looming its head in what is supposed to be the most legally free country on the planet.

If this is allowed to happen here, if NOBODY is allowed to say things ANYWHERE, then what happens to those offensive voices? What happens to those who decide what is and isn’t offensive?

What happens to you?


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:  

Highly rEsteemed!

I always appreciate your point of view. As for AJ, I've been seeing this coming and preemptively inviting good content producers HERE to this Blockchain project. I don't like the press that AJ is getting over the rampant censorship that's happening to everyone else like Ron Paul.

At this stage of the game, I'm waiting to see IF there will be a big shift over to Steem...

I doubt it...

Because while I've been helping onboard a few users to Steem, I have also had to become a sort of Support Department for ALLLLL of the Bitchy complaints that people come up with about getting setup here... I don't just want to name drop but let's just say that AJ and people like him have been invited. Unfortunately, even the "Smartest" folks have absolutely no time or interest in trying to learn how Steem works and are put off in so many ways from learning it because... well... because SteemIt SUCKS! Did you catch that? I made the distinction between the Badass Blockchain, and the Self appointed Front End CORPSEoration that literally exploited the pre-mine and then blew the last two years of development.

So what I'm really interested in watching is HOW BADLY SteemIt BLOWS the opportunity to bring Big BRAND content creators over here in the PERFECT STORM of adoption phase. I Guarantee you my friend, this is a freaky circus sideshow we're watching in the media but people are going to remain steadfast to their Social Media Click regardless of it going 1984. I'm so glad I got off the other networks BEFORE it was cool.

I also strongly agree with your HUGE PROBLEM and the conclusion.

Kind regards and SteemOn Bruv!



I appreciate the opinion.

I've heard others criticize Steemit lately, too. I hope it works out, but it would be nice to have more than hope!


What if I told you the Blobfish inspired me to do a simple text based ARG here on SteemIt over two years ago? @frankbacon is VESTED in SteemIt whether I like it or not. And we will have some entertainment while we're here ; )
Thank you and SteemON Bruv!


Screen Shot 2018-07-26 at 7.53.24 PM.png

Superb article Shane. With regards to the following

I remember the good old days when there was something called the Burden of Proof:

I am not sure about other countries, though I did write an article on my old deliberator account, showing the UK changed the law in 2001 or so, from actual (or factual) to perceived, so if someone says something about someone else, and they take it the wrong way, they can take action on how "they perceive" it to be, rather than how it actually (factually) is.

This law change has made the behaviour of some people now able to react like your unfortunate encounter above.


That's terrifying…


I had to trawl back through 4 months of posts to find it, I hope you enjoy it.

To listen to the audio version of this article click on the play image.

Brought to you by @tts. If you find it useful please consider upvoting this reply.

I believe we are at war world wide. Freedom is under attack, freedom of speech doesn't mean you allow only what you like to hear. It means people are allowed to say things you don't like. Hate Speech is free speech even if we don't like it. This is going to wake up the silent majority in the United states and Trump will be re elected and the republicans are going to win even more seats in NOV. This is the worst thing the liberals could have possibly done. I didn't really care about Alex Jones because I thought he was ridiculous but now I see him as one of the most important people in the world and a Martyr for freedom.
If these actions continue Bombs will go off, bullets will fly and the US will turn red one way or the other.


Well said.

I don't think his enemies know how to beat him because everything they seem to do backfires.

In any case, we need a catalyst for change in this country. The sickness that was growing just beneath the surface is exposed now. The People will either act as the immune system for the country or the body will die.

typical.. you get muted once reason and logic come into play. This is who is in control; and it's been no different since the dark ages (actually pretty much forever). You are just experiencing your 'freedom' slipping away, until it is completely stripped and the nobleman and landlords rape wives again without impunity.


I wish reason would've had a chance to come into play. The guy didn't present any evidence or persuasive argument to be reasoned with

if you make a claim, it is your responsibility to either produce evidence to justify the claim or to be persuasive in your argument.

If ever there were a code of ethics list for the internet, this would be on the list for sure.

the newsletter WAS the backup plan so that people could still get updates on what Alex Jones and InfoWars is doing. But they removed that option from him.

Funny how instead of being outraged at blatant censorship, the media is angry that Twitter and the app store hasn't censored AJ.

Wonderful timing for this, just a few months before the election. Don't they realize they've given AJ and his multitudes of followers the coveted 'victim status' that they exploit everyday? Don't they realize that anyone who didn't know who AJ was or Infowars... well they know now and probably has the app installed on their phone now?

Too bad infowars never got on the blockchain, we'd have a multitude of new steemit users right now.



It would be interesting if infowars got on Steemit. I wonder how they'd use it.

But yes, I think they're testing how the public responds to this action then they'll roll it out in everyone else with descending opinions. It's already happening. But they're too early, I think. Jones is even more popular than ever now and people are upset about this.