Censorship is what happens when people with greater powers than others go from saying “I hate this speech!” to factually suppressing that speech. Censorship IS hate speech enacted. Institutionally. Institutional hate that breeds more hate. And institutions follow an agenda. So there is a hate agenda.
Censorship has never protected anyone from hate. If only hate was just about speech! Censorship actually exacerbates hate through frustration. Most ideologically motivated mass shooters were deeply frustrated that their message was suppressed, and they killed people as a way to make themselves heard, among others.
In establishment’s propaganda, “hate speech” has become speech hated by the powers that be. Stalin and all communist dictators branded any opponent “enemy of the people” and any dissenting speech as “subversive”. Replace that with the more contemporary “conspiracy theorist / terrorist” and “hate speech”, see if it reminds you of anyone.
Censorship means we are paying people to take away our speech and our vision. Collectively, censorship doesn’t happen TO us from an entirely external source. Censorship happens usually when a society abandons itself and the fight for freedom because it’s been bought up with more comfort or, more often, with promises of comfort. And, eventually, that comfort always proves to be less preferable than the comfort of liberty.
So censorship doesn’t really protect the people, but, in almost every instance, it has protected powerful and corrupt people from truth. Even the hate that it breeds fits a control agenda, because it’s divisive and it distracts us from lies, corruption and systemic failures. It robs us of messages of love and help from other people, when they go against the censor’s agenda . It’s just another typical situation of problem sold as a solution to itself. Logical hocus-pocus. That’s why they don’t properly teach logic in schools.
There is no way in which censorship can be beneficial, neither to the censored OR the censor. The latter always ends up suffering a form of strong backlash, because the energies it tries to suppress always find a way through, energy doesn’t disappear, doesn’t stay locked forever, it always transforms and manifests.
There’s no way censorship works for us, but there’s a million ways it can go against us.
Fight censorship simply by not participating in it and not collaborating with censors!
If you enjoy any of my work, remember that most of what I do is made freely available to the general public and I rely on your support for keeping it that way, so buy me a coffee if you feel like it, thank you!
! My articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
…the government. In any country ever. Competed only by Pharmafia, for the past hundred years. Almost every death is premature because of them. And there’s one more plot twist.
THEY PLAN IT WITH THEIR HEADS AND EXECUTE IT WITH OUR HANDS
The most superficial or the deepest study of the most mainstream or most alternative history, any official statistics, they all reveal this; and a simple observation of the world outside our heads confirms it. I just added 1 and 1. I can’t anticipate any factual and rational argument against these notes above. If it comes, I’ll address it, maybe even in an edit to this article. I just hope you realize I’m not talking only gun death. Murder is murder, regardless the weapon. Remember this for later. Now, for the people who like to zoom in once they got the big picture…
I have a good tip
I found it recently and I’m currently digging in. And I’m not saying to embrace this book with everything in it, not at all, it just seems a good start and middle ground for discussions and learning, as it’s coming from the establishment, so establishment dupes can’t argue it. But I will actually make an argument (out of many) against it.
“Death by Government” is a compelling look at the horrors that occur in modern societies. It depicts how democide has been very much a part of human history. Among other examples, the book includes the massacre of Europeans during the Thirty Years’ War, the relatively unknown genocide of the French Revolution, and the slaughtering of American Indians by colonists in the New World. This riveting account is an essential tool for historians, political scientists, and scholars interested in the study of genocide.
The author is R. J. Rummel , Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Hawaii, who has dedicated his entire career to this topic – lethal governance. He received numerous grants from NSF, ARPA, and the United States Peace Research Institute. Frequently nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. Received the Susan Strange Award of the International Studies Association for having intellectually most challenged the field in 1999; the Lifetime Achievement Award 2003 from the Conflict Processes Section, American Political Science Association; and the 2007 The International Association of Genocide Scholars’ Award for Distinguished Lifetime Contribution to the Field of Genocide and Democide Studies and Prevention. So he’s on the payroll for the US Government and a homey for the political establishment, if you’re a frequent buyer of the official narrative, Rummel is it. Of course, with such privileges, there’s always bias. If you can see through it, you can learn more than if you don’t, but either way you learn.
LOOK FOR A REAL SOLUTION, THOUGH!
Coming from a US Government mouthpiece, you can expect the book to be filled with their type of propaganda and misinformation, but if the work seems more balanced in its body, it’s precisely to earn your trust and sell you a twisted conclusion and solution.
What has kept me at this was the belief, as preliminary research seemed to suggest, that there was a positive solution to all this killing and a clear course of political action and policy to end it. And the results verify this. The problem is Power. The solution is democracy. The course of action is to foster freedom.
R J Rummel
He bases his belief in democracy on war statistics, gun and violent death statistics and such, from which he draws the conclusion that democracies foster less death.
Aaandd that’s where you’re wrong, buddy!
Nevermind the fact that Rummel’s favorite democracy, the one that pays him to write these things, has been at war most of its history. Nevermind that democracy is not freedom, quite the opposite, it’s the dictatorship of majority over minorities; and that majority is usually dumb, ignorant, easy to manipulate by a few super-rich psychos and their generals. And I could go on, but I’ll skip right to the main point:
There’s 99millions way to die, and he’s covered less than ten. And the government has a hand in 99% of these ways.
From Physicians Weekly
Maybe I forgot a couple, but there’s basically only one governmental
measure I can remember that drastically increased the lifespan of
populations: the push for better sanitation and water access in some
places, not long ago. And even then, governments usually ran various
parallel actions of population-culling, to make sure all this health
won’t make the livestock explode beyond their means of control. Overall,
government activity leads to more premature death than to an increased
life expectation. Whatever they did fine could’ve been done better at
the moment, with the resources available. The difference amounts to
years of life for the average Joe. The government can be associated with, but rarely can be proven to cause more life than death. Look
all you want, you won’t find many exceptions from the general rule I
presented in this article. And all those exceptions will sum up to a
tiny fraction of all the human experience since people started to
outsource self-governance, at gun-point usually.
If you are to start a mass-murderer hunt, in the light of some TV programming, start with the biggest!
If you enjoy any of my work, remember that most of what I do is made freely available to the general public and I rely on your support for keeping it that way, buy me a coffee if you feel like it, thank you!
! My articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
Reddit me this: – If you are a musician, you’re more than welcome to post your Soundcloud and Spotify links in Reddit subs. – If you are a journalist, you’re more than welcome to post links to your published articles in Reddit subs. – If you are a photographer and you want to post a link to your photography website or portfolio, you’re a spammer, you’re scum, your post will be taken down from most Reddit subs and you’re even risking a ban.
Not as many people are as familiar with Reddit as with Facebook or other socials, so here’s a little context:
Imagine Facebook was only made of groups and group admins were the Suckerbergs of their domains. This is Reddit for you. When they’re dealing with photography or graphic design or any type of still images, almost all these admins treat creators as milk cows, using their work to drive traffic, engage audiences, grow their influence and sometimes push a product. But if photographers dare to hope for some minimal support, all they get is a spit in the face! As if we are the scum of the Earth for hoping to get some following if our work is appreciated. No one is asking for money, crowdfunding or any direct material compensation. Most of us are so starving for attention on a super-competitive stage that we’re happy to do it for a few bare page views on our websites. But nah, that’s too much to ask, all we are allowed to earn is meaningless upvotes (likes in Facebook terms) which lead nowhere. Reddit brands itself as the “Frontpage of Internet” but when it comes to photography, it’s just a sinkhole where talent gets exhausted for nothing and quickly buried. This is not going on only in Photography subs (groups, in Facebook terms), but in most of them. Some of the biggest leaches are the Travel subs, where photography can be even prevalent over other types of posts. There, this crazy unjustified double standard is even more obvious: you can post a video that directly links to your Youtube channel, you can post an article that links directly to a news organization (which is for-profit), but photographers are 2nd hand reditters, they don’t deserve same privileges, they are expected to kiss admins’ feet for being slaved and disregarded.
Linking is a matter of etiquette in most artistic communities.
How is a photography portfolio link any different from, let’s say, article links, which link to the business that created them? No one asks people to copy-paste the articles in posts, to avoid spam in favor of the publisher. What if people from music subs/groups asked musicians to upload their music directly in posts and stop linking to their Soundcloud?! I have an even better idea: forget Youtube links, let’s start producing original video content, catered especially for these special Reddit admins, and upload it there, free of charge! Yeah, sounds insane, my point exactly, I mean: where do you draw the line?? The double standard is not just obvious, it’s insane and deplorable. This abusive attitude is not even limited to Reddit, that’s just where I find it almost ubiquitous, but it’s quite prevalent on Facebook, MeWe and other socials too. I wonder who came up with the concept that photographers are lower-class artists and deserve to slave for the benefit of some social media parasites.
How is the Reddit organization regarding this behavior?
In its “guidelines for best practices” Redit states: “We’re not making a judgement on your quality, just your behavior on reddit. Your stuff’s probably amazing and someone would be really interested in it but… If you submit mostly your own links and your presence on reddit is mostly for your self-promotion of your brand, page, blog, app, or business, you are more likely to be a spammer than you think! Read the FAQ and make sure that you really understand that.” Self promotion runs the world in 2019, it drives personal growth, self-sufficiency and self-sustainability. It should be encouraged, not seen as a disease. But many people prefer you dependent on them, otherwise their existence would be meaningless. No one seems to take action when they are flooded with corporate self-promo, even when it’s painted on their chest (t-shirt), because that’s called “advertising” and it’s ok. Meanwhile, the most sour, salty and unaccomplished members of society can’t wait to tax the plebs for attempting to post a mere link to their website because that’s “spam”. However, this is not my main argument here. The problem is that, even if you accept this retrograde, disconnected and mindless stance from Reddit, admins/mods still don’t seem to care about it. They definitely make no distinctions, everyone is a spammer in their eyes, you won’t see anyone excepted for good behavior from their brutal and abusive ruling. Anyone but themselves. “Reddit is different from any other place on the web – first and foremost, it’s about community, discussion, and sharing. Honor that and you’ll love it here”, they brag. In fact, everyone in social media attempts the same thing, that’s nothing original. The only thing different about Reddit is that it expects you to honor it and offers nothing in return, besides contempt and disrespect. At least for photographers and such.
A simple and practical solution in two steps:
Step 1. Be the change we all need to see on Reddit: Make a sub that accomplishes three things: – shows actual love to photographers, – allows them to truly benefit from their contributions, – actively pushes users to support what they use / love
Just limit the number of daily posts per person to avoid abuse, and limit the links to one per post, which has to lead to a portfolio or similar, not photo equipment sales or such. And I bet my ass that you will beget tons of love, the best contributions and some the best photographers. I would do it myself, but I can hardly manage my current online presence, I’m doing more things than anyone has time to hear about. So I’m hoping that someone who has the resources and the good motivation picks up on this idea and invites me to the inauguration. I will reward that sub with all the free promo I can offer! I’m an amateur photographer, it’s not my main activity, not even the second on my list of occupations. But I love the art, I put my soul on a plate when I take and publish an image, I love gifted artists, and I think just treatment should be the default in a healthy society. I know for a fact that all situations we put ourselves in should be win-win, otherwise they are lose-lose. Reddit admins think they should be win-fv#k off. No one really wins when the partner loses.
Step 2. Boycott and protest the leeches, instead of feeding them your work.
Who wants to be the positive character in this dystopia / internet drama and do it right? Now would be a great time for you to act!
If you enjoy any of my work, remember that most of what I do is made freely available to the general public and I rely on your support for keeping it that way, buy me a coffee if you feel like it, thank you!
! My articles can always be subject of later editing as a way of perfecting them
SILVIEW.media 