On Platforms, Publishers and Payment Processors
Much as I hate to bloviate on topics that I have covered in the past, there is once again pressure being pushed from the market to stifle the speech of the common man. I have covered at length my thoughts on the matter, but as I learn more about the intricacies of the issue, all the more do I come to realize how deeply rooted it is, and how far society must reach to ensure that contrary opinions that people want to hear are not silenced by the authoritarian progressive censorship machine. It would be bad enough that we stand poised for the passing of articles 11 and 13, which barring the protest that this organization intends to put on, and the voices of the people being heard by the European Union, will result in most functions of our modern social platforms being eviscerated. Despite this, apparently progressive voices would rather ensure that a man who said the N-word on a stream once to insult Nazis can no longer monetize his content.
I do not seek to make much ado about nothing, in that I personally do not care for Carl Benjamin’s (Alias Sargon of Akkad) tepid use of racial language to insult racial identitarians. It is clear he meant it not as an insult to any “person of color” as progressive nomenclature would have us call them today. I am often a critic of Carl just as much as I am a fan of his work, but even I can see the clear hypocrisy of progressive YouTube when Sargon is lambasted and attacked for his use of the word when literally insulting Nazis with it, but someone like Ian “iDubbbz” Carter who frequently uses the term and worse as a joke walks free. The double standard is evident. Comedians are allowed to say whatever they like, but the moment you actually challenge the big, bad, boogeyman that progressives love to use as evidence of the necessity of their actions, you get de-personed and deplatformed, because people can’t dare speak ill of white identitarians unless it’s through an identitarian ideological lens.
More than just tepid use of language though, it has become clear through Sargon’s removal from Patreon (in direct violation of Patreon’s own terms of service and contrary to what CEO Jack Conte had claimed their policy would cover) and the subsequent brigading of new service SubscribeStar by the likes of Sleeping Giants, a shady group of social pressuring progressives who seek to push advertisers away from content they don’t even consume, that there are sinister workings behind this wave of bans. Paypal now refuses to accept handling payment transfers to SubscribeStar because of this pressure. Progressive ideologues continue to brigade against voices they don’t like hearing, and attempting to deplatform them out of spite, as apparently they cannot tolerate any opinion that is not their own existing on the internet. Heaven forbid you remind them how authoritarian such actions are, however. It seems that some can’t quite come to grips with the fact that brow-beating and forcibly silencing your political opponents is the exact way that the fascists in Germany and Italy gained political power.
As I sit here, I cannot help but question what can be done about this conundrum. Parties which should be neutral have failed utterly to abide by such policies, opting instead to listen to a fringe group of leftist ideologues and using their massive power as pillars among the internet to silence dissident thought. I wonder if building a bank and using it to back a payment processor would be of benefit, when the next move by progressives would likely be to simply attempt to undercut the hosting service of the processor in question. How long before we have ideological progressive DdoS attacks co-ordinated on social media? Twitter already refuses to ban the likes of Antifa despite them being labelled a domestic terrorist group by the DHS in America. Will they also tolerate cyber-terrorism being plotted on their site in the name of progressive ideology? When does the buck stop?
Some proponents seem to think crypto-currency is the way forward, and that the only way to build a new platform is to eschew fiat altogether. That comes with its own challenges, as most nations take issue with crypto due to it being a market they can’t control or regulate, which naturally leads to prices bottoming out. It will be hard to say how the market solution will be solved going forward, but I for one hope that someone somewhere brings these companies to task and makes them delineate between their status as either publishers, or platforms. If they are the former, they become responsible for everything on their site. If they are the latter, they should be responsible for none of it and not be driven by ideologues to censor anyone. There should be no legal space in between. Anyone attempting to operate in such a space should be shunted to one side or the other, and then audited accordingly.