Deplatforming is a form of economic Warfare

ms224

Woodpecker
Section 230
Marsh vs Alabama
Monopoly rules
Private company towns with public spaces

Nothing new here just in cyber space, they need to get their asses
handed to them
 

moneyshot

Woodpecker
not exactly related to deplatforming, but I just learned a few days ago that the "breakup" of AT&T in the 80s has been completely undone without a peep from the media (or at least what I've taken in). all the "Baby Bells" are back together as one, plus more. I guess antitrust law is really dead.
 

Valentine

Kingfisher
Gold Member
RatInTheWoods said:
Every single private entity providing internet services could be set up in a unregulated/peer based/anonymous style environment. It's what the net does best - decentralised and remove control.


Facebook, google, twitter could all be replaced overnight with other platforms, if the majority of their users really are unhappy with the private companies doing it all for free currently.
New distributed platforms are the way forward however for many services it will be an uphill struggle if it's at all possible because of natural monopolies.

For example:

Google Search is incredibly difficult to do in a decentralised fashion because building an algorithm for search relevance takes years, people are used to it being a free utility and they won't give up the convenience/time-saving of seeing accurate results. There are a few projects like Presearch attempting to compete but so far haven't produced anything significant.

DNS (domain name resolution) is another difficult centralised system to change. You've got the power of ICANN, domain registries (VeriSign etc), domain registrars (GoDaddy etc), certificate authorities (Symantec etc), DNS hosts (Cloudflare etc). There are projects like Handshake who are attempting to decentralise this but gaining critical mass will be incredibly hard with so many interests aligned against it.

Other platforms are relatively simple to create decentralised alternatives for like social media, e-commerce, file hosting etc but there are a few areas where gaining a significant base of users will take a decade at the minimum.
 
I've always been curious whether the boycott could be applied in this day and age as an economic counter-strike without the target suing anyone who refused to have any commerce with them.

Can someone bring action if you don't deal with them on account of their objectionable beliefs? I think Britain might see this owing to divisions brought about by Brexit (probably in small numbers and pretty passive-aggressive in delivery, iff at all, because we're British) and it's the kind of measure there isn't any real retaliation to. If there was an organised refusal to not make transfers via PayPal, even by a minority of customers, or shoppers protested Amazon by buying on the high street or just through other websites, surely that'll make people notice.
And if individuals were singled out and sent to Coventry-shunned socially, for those of you who don't know our geography, there's probably no way to prevent it, since objecting makes them look the more unlikeable.
Obviously it's never that simple to organise or target, as whoever noplatforms media that's right of centre or even common-sense is likely to be an anomymous drone at YouTube or some professional bed-wetters with a hashtag, but it could be done and it couldn't be stopped.
 

redpillage

Ostrich
Gold Member
infowarrior1 said:
Sam Harris leaves Patreon
I stopped listening at 'he said a racist word though'. Racism just like islamophobia are words invented by fascists, and used by cowards to control the weak and the gullible.

'Hate speech' is a nothing but a tool to silence the opposition. Whoever accepts this course of thinking should be considered a fallen victim of the culture war. If Joe Rogan represents one of the leading voices on our side then we are effectively floating dead in the water.
 

infowarrior1

Hummingbird
redpillage said:
infowarrior1 said:
Sam Harris leaves Patreon
I stopped listening at 'he said a racist word though'. Racism just like islamophobia are words invented by fascists, and used by cowards to control the weak and the gullible.

'Hate speech' is a nothing but a tool to silence the opposition. Whoever accepts this course of thinking should be considered a fallen victim of the culture war. If Joe Rogan represents one of the leading voices on our side then we are effectively floating dead in the water.
I don't think Joe Rogan is on our side at all. But he represents more of a normie mainstream position.

The Joe Rogan show is also hosted in California Los Angeles. So he is located in the California bubble as well which would influence his position.

He covers a lot of interesting topics and various interesting guests aside from this clip.

One has to realize that however accurate that one is in opinion. Its not necessarily mainstream. People have their blindspots and swallow various assumptions without thinking it the least unusual or wrong.

But the fact that Sam Harris has left Patreon and Joe Rogan is talking about it shows that the ripple effects are more noticeable to the mainstream discourse.
 

Christhugger

Kingfisher
Oh good - My favourite Maverick commentators are taking a stand against facism and the ultra unacceptable internet crackdown on free speech that boils my blood so... I guess there is still hope afterall. *Puts down pitchfork*
 
Top