Will Steem become a valid decentralized social media network, or just a tool to push political correctness and Marxist propaganda like every other social network? Let's put that to the test right now.
With the number one, most effective, censorship resistance testing system on the entire planet, Dr. David Duke:
Now most people are immediately going to think, oh, I've heard of this guy - the media told me he's an evil extremist that probably wants to hang people with a slightly different skin color for fun or sport. The media also told you to buy Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns seconds before collapse.
In reality, this guy is mostly just pushing a boring, isolationist, live and let live policy. The same isolationist policy preached by black civil rights leaders like Marcus Garvey who say they have to form their own homeland where they exist as the majority in order to not be second class citizens. The same policy preached by Zionists who created their own ethnocentric state.
What's that you say? Zionists, black civil rights leaders and David Duke are all preaching the exact same thing? Independence and self autonomy by creating a civilization where you're not a second class citizen? It is interesting how differently each group's ideology is portrayed: one as politically correct (Zionism), blacks as kind of a dangerous fringe movement that you should be weary of, and David Duke as a physical incarnation of Satan himself.
It is no accident the dice landed that way; the dice were rigged by design. It's much easier to control a divided people than a strong, homogeneous group. If there's a banking system that's horribly fraudulent and detrimental to everyone in a country, the nation with a homogeneous population can and will throw them out like they did in Iceland. This is why banking oligarchs like George Soros fund Black Lives Matter, a way to try and incite civil unrest between different ethnic groups - a more in your face, immediate problem instead of dealing with bigger problems like the bankers.
So, that brings us to the next part of this operation, to see if this social media platform is going to be nothing but a tool of political correctness and propaganda, or a platform where all sides of the equation are heard:
not a fan of David Duke but if he signs up and doesn't get censored that would really be a testament to Steemit.
Yes, I'm very curious as to whether someone who isn't pushing some popular opinion narrative can actually use this site, as I see a lot of stuff being voted to front page is just lowest common denominator, bimbo content.
Also, you have a bunch of opposing small time alternative groups in the media: Alex Jones type of people, Young Turks type of people, David Duke, that Milo guy, etc. If Steem has a problem with spam and enacts harsh spam guards, then politically correct SJWs downvote all the legit content they don't like into the spam category, the decentralized aspect would just mean rule by the lowest information voter, politically correct, popular opinion clowns.
I have not seen any real content or posts to seriously put that to the test so far, so I decided to make this one.
While I see the point you are TRYING to make, David Duke is actually a racist.
For example, Ben Shapiro doesn't ever really mention being Jewish, and is definitely not a Marxist. But David Duke made this meme and posted it on Twitter directed at Ben Shapiro, just so everyone would know he was Jewish.
This isn't "Live and let live" this is hate.
Want me to perform a test on you to see if you're racist? Simple. In terms of mating partners, do you have any preference whatsoever in terms of what your ideal woman would look like? If so, your brain is saying those genes and phenotype are superior to whatever ones you did not pick.
Preference alone is in fact racism, and pretty much everyone walking the planet tends to have some type of physical preference. It is the coward's way out to pretend facts like this do not exist and just say, la de da, I'm the politically correct moral high ground and can do no wrong. In reality, everyone walking the planet regardless of what ethnic group is likely technically a "racist".
It's a thing that always exists. It was just turned into a political weapon, usually to try and push things like Marxism which centralizes power and control.
Anyway, bringing big names to the table is always a good thing, even if your personal view of them isn't good.
This type of mentality is pretty dualistic and very retrograde. This test is pretty stupid, rather than simple. Let me try to educate anyone else before they fall for this polarized perspective. First lets start by searching the definition of Racism.
So basically the most relevant keywords here are : 1. Belief in Superiority, Right to Dominate, Belief in Inferiority, Discrimination, Hatred, Intolerance. I think your test would be better based on the word "Discrimination" and not "Racist," so I don't think you're wrong but then lets define Discrimination:
I know this will only make what should have been a simple reply longer, but here is the definition for distinction while we're at it
So your test probably fits more into a category of "discrimination and favoritism"
I don't see how you get "Preference alone is in fact racism," preference is preference and does not imply discrimination much less a belief in superiority. Favoritism and Discrimination do not imply anything but favoritism and discrimination as they are defined. Preferring to drink wine than to drink beer does not make you racist, and there is more than likely a reason why men prefer some woman over others. More than likely that reason is due to conditioning, and the environment in which one grows, but this is still preference, not racism. When you're young you tend to reject different flavors or tastes, me for example I hated any type of seafood until I grew up and acquired taste. The same thing can happen with any human having preference for one race, then acquiring taste for another race, but generally the reasons have nothing to do with racism or the belief in superiority/inferiority, hate and intolerance. It's just a simple preference, you're only trying to polarize an idea, which is against being truthful. The truth is neutral it is never black or white, positive or negative, the truth simply is. You can say the truth lies in between black and white, but whenever you are polarizing it you are doing so for your own agenda. By trying to impose that preference/favoritism/discrimination/ is racist, you will only perpetuate confusion and the big misconception the very people who centralize power and control are trying to achieve.
For those seeking the truth remember that the truth is unbiased and cannot be polarized, when you are ready to see things as they are rather than what you want them to be, when you are concerned with the understanding of mankind you will learn that neutrality is the quickest path to spiritual growth and the maturing of the human species. Only by learning to see the truth and removing our prejudices, our bias, assumptions, can we learn that we are all human, we are MEN of different HUE but we belong to a single species. If we are divided we have been fooled, and we will continue to be controlled. If we are united we can end war, poverty, famine, violence, homelessness and an infinite amount of problems.
"hatred or intolerance of another race"
We both know anytime you look at the media nowadays, 99% of the stuff being called "racism" has nothing to do with hatred. It's entirely a political weapon to manipulate the cattle mainstream by saying "do this or you will be a bad person and not the moral high ground".
It's the same thing with all the SJW stuff, a method to try to guilt trip people into Marxist collectivism. You're trying to play the role of an "authority figure" like you get to manipulate everyone into living and acting in a certain manner. Manipulation always has a purpose. It's never done just for the hell of it, and I already explained why people like George Soros perform that manipulation in the original post.
Political correctness is now dead because nobody is falling for this garbage anymore.
Yeah, one thing is choosing your mate and another thing is pushing for the killing of people, dont you think?
Yep, David Duke's pretty much certainly a racist.
Plenty of other people are racist, too. I'm a white, middle-class dude, so even I get a little nervous when I walk down the street and someone of a darker skin tone walks by. It's that fear of the Other that we all have inside - someone with a different face, different voice, different body. It's natural to a degree.
You can choose to be racist, if you want to. You can also choose not to be. Just like you can choose to post, curate, and comment on Steemit, or you can choose not to.
I'm not a fan of David Duke. I'm also pretty sick of Zionism too. If David Duke, or Benjamin Netanyahu, or anyone else wants to use Steemit to try to build their own ideology they can go ahead and do that. I won't upvote any of their content, because I'm not aligned with those ideologies.
I'm not going to downvote them either, though. Yeah that sounds pretty awful - I would be permitting what I and many other people consider hate speech to flourish - but people have a right to their opinions, even if it's my opinion that they're awful, divisive, incendiary, and morally wrong. Censorship, even of truly heinous thoughts and ideas, prevents a discussion of just how heinous those thoughts and ideas are.
I noticed you conveniently skipped over my "racism" test. Nobody wants to admit that the act of having a physical preference at all in mating partners is in fact "racism". Should preferences be banned? Where does it end? You can either destroy all political correctness or be enslaved by the parties that use it as a political weapon.
I actually missed your post, as I must have been typing my original reply as you were composing yours.
People are attracted to who they're attracted to. Am I prejudiced for not wanting to have sex with someone I find physically unattractive? It's a physiological response. Sure there may be some learned bias there too, probably quite a bit in some instances, but the idea of running someone down for not wanting to have sex with someone from a specific ethnicity seems as insane as running someone down for not wanting to have sex with someone who wasn't their preferred gender.
If you don't want to have sex with me and I don't want to have sex with you, we don't have a problem. If you do want to have sex with me but I don't, you've got the problem, not me. Accusing someone of being racist for not wanting to have sex with them seems bizarre.
Yep according to r0ach's mentality I could say "Well if I (Female) don't have sex with another Female, then I must be a sexist homophobe." How does this happen? How do people polarize and associate words with things seemingly magically? I'm going to have to blame Television, shit like Fox News, all this shit you see on TV is specifically designed to program people to perceive things dualistically. That's how they keep people from seeing the truth
Great post. So far so good for Steemit. We'll see how it goes with time :)
Hopefully this social media( steemit) is transparent from any kind of politicians and etc . hopefully freedom of speech not just a word being create by politicians . :)
can't wait to the response, good @r0achtheunsavory
Never Trust a Jew
https://steemit.com/jew/@bitcoin1488/atrocities
KKK leaders just want to live and let live
That is only your opinion, man
Also. Not a lot of Marcus Garveys left in the world. If you told a Black Black Lives Matter activist to go back to Africa, they would probably get pissed. And that was kind of his main thing "Africa for the Africans". So to say that David Duke is like Marcus Garvey (from that perspective and in that context) may be kind of accurate, Marcus Garvey is from a different era, and one that David Duke would probably love to be a part of (segregation, etc).
"Also. Not a lot of Marcus Garveys left in the world. If you told a Black Black Lives Matter activist"
Black Lives Matter "activists" are not as smart as Marcus Garvey. Most worship at an alter of violence and illiteracy called rap music. Why even try to compare the two? Garvey was educated and those people out in the streets breaking things are not. He would also approve of this post because:
Garvey once stated: "I regard the Klan, the Anglo-Saxon clubs and White American societies, as far as the Negro is concerned, as better friends of the race than all other groups of hypocritical whites put together. I like honesty and fair play."
He had meetings with the KKK to try and figure out a solution. It turns out, both groups actually wanted the exact same thing. A place where they would not be second class citizens and self determination.
Interesting view! I guess only time will tell?
Hey, somebody had to test the censorship resistance of this thing...