Alex Jones' bad day

[HRDavies]

nope. a totalitarian regime silencing reporting of actual events, censoring and jailing dissidents, is nothing like a democratic society de-platforming paranoid conspiracy theorists and violent rhetoric for the protection, not of the current administrators, but of democracy itself.

You don't know this. You can't know this. The only reason you believe this is you listen to the New York Times etc etc. People who listen to Faux News have the exact opposite opinion.

Admittedly, in the US you and I have a lot more ability to make rational judgements based on our own experience. But in China, you have none. Zero, zip, nada, none. You just believe what the Establishment wants you to believe. This is not any sort of basis for factual understanding.

The establishment has a long well-documented history of lying to the public. If you still want to believe them, what can I say ? It's not intellectually supportable. You're doing it because you want to, not because you have any evidence or even understand the situation.

Censorship is censorship. Either you believe in it or you don't. In fact, if you look at it rationally, there are good reasons for a degree of censorship. it's the amount that should be in question, not the principle.

[John Smith]

No it's not a bogus comparison. It's the exact same thing, keeping people from lying on a widely-disseminated platform to influence the public in a deceitful manner.

It's a different method of approaching the problem but the intent is exactly the same.

I can understand the fixation with free speech but freedom to lie, sorry, not something that should be protected imo.

Fraud is a crime. Inciting violence is a crime. Yelling "FIRE!" in a crowded theater is a crime, unless there is a fire. Slander and Libel are not free speech.

[John Smith]

I'm agreeing with you. The only thing is, when China does it you hate it and scream "censorship !"

There's a difference between stating an opinion versus stating as fact something that is not a fact.

[L.W. Baxter]

Censorship is censorship. Either you believe in it or you don't. In fact, if you look at it rationally, there are good reasons for a degree of censorship. it's the amount that should be in question, not the principle.

it is only an accident of language that we apply the word “censorship” to both the behavior of a totalitarian regime inoculating itself to factual reporting and criticism, and to the creation by the citizenry of a democratic country rules about lies and incitement to protect their enfranchisement.

if only we had two words to describe these very different behaviors, even you would understand that one is not like the other.

[HRDavies]

nope. a totalitarian regime silencing reporting of actual events, censoring and jailing dissidents, is nothing like a democratic society de-platforming paranoid conspiracy theorists ...

Oh good, prehaps you can enlighten me about how your just and righteous democratic society protected itself from Paul Robeson, Joe Hill, Tom Mooney, Fred Hampton, Buffy Sainte-Marie, Arthur Miller, Robert Oppenheimer, Huey Newton, Julian Assange, Muhammad Ali, Edward Snowden and scores of others ?

I'm pretty sure you will manufacture some difference but to the unbiased eye, same-o same-o, captain.

the behavior of a totalitarian regime inoculating itself to factual reporting and criticism

You honestly do not have a clue about what the censorship bureau actually does. Which is to be expected I guess, since so few people know a damn thing about China (which doesn't stop anyone from running off at the mouth, unfortunately.)

[HRDavies]

Do you also rage when you order noodles?

People selling noodles are not hypocrites, there's no reason to get upset with them. But actually, I usually go for rice dishes, trying to cut back a little on carbs. Yes I know but at least it's a little less processed ...

btw, are you dissident-supporting censorship-haters aware of the Hatch Act ? Or any of the other legislative acts specifically banning and penalizing dissent in the US ? Are they reasonable ? Not my decision to make. But screaming about China while engaging in the same activities is called hypocrisy.

This is worth a few minutes

https://mronline.org/2022/11/29/west...china-bashing/

it could be extended to chapter length easily but good enough for a short version

[Chip-skiff]

The exercise of censorship in the US and the overwhelming censorship in China are not by any stretch of the imagination the same.

[Nicholas Carey]

The Hatch Act prohibits employees of the Federal government from engaging in partisan political activity. While on the job.

That's not censorship. It prohibits abuse of office. A simple condition of employment. Want to shill for Trump or any other candidate? Fine, go get another job.

Federal employees may do pretty much whatever they want when they're off the clock and out of the office and not acting under color of authority. The sole exception,perhaps, being the prohibition against standing for a partisan office.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct.aspx

I believe you are about the only soul I have ever heard whine about the Hatch Act.

Have you ever actually read the Hatch Act? Here it is in toto. If this is "censorship", you have a very perverted view of acceptable "speech".

5 USC 7323(a)

5 U.S. Code § 7323 - Political activity authorized; prohibitions

(a) Subject to the provisions of subsection (b), an employee may take an active part in political management or in political campaigns, except an employee may not—

(1) use his official authority or influence for the purpose of interfering with or affecting the result of an election;

(2) knowingly solicit, accept, or receive a political contribution from any person, unless such person is—

(A) a member of the same Federal labor organization as defined under section 7103(4) of this title or a Federal employee organization which as of the date of enactment of the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993 had a multicandidate political committee (as defined under section 315(a)(4) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(4))); [1]

(B) not a subordinate employee; and

(C) the solicitation is for a contribution to the multicandidate political committee (as defined under section 315(a)(4) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(4))) 1 of such Federal labor organization as defined under section 7103(4) of this title or a Federal employee organization which as of the date of the enactment of the Hatch Act Reform Amendments of 1993 had a multicandidate political committee (as defined under section 315(a)(4) of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 441a(a)(4))); 1 or

(3) run for the nomination or as a candidate for election to a partisan political office; or

(4) knowingly solicit or discourage the participation in any political activity of any person who—

(A) has an application for any compensation, grant, contract, ruling, license, permit, or certificate pending before the employing office of such employee; or

(B) is the subject of or a participant in an ongoing audit, investigation, or enforcement action being carried out by the employing office of such employee.

5 USC 7324(a)

5 U.S. Code § 7324 - Political activities on duty; prohibition

(a) An employee may not engage in political activity—

(1) while the employee is on duty;

(2) in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an individual employed or holding office in the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof;

(3) while wearing a uniform or official insignia identifying the office or position of the employee; or

(4) using any vehicle owned or leased by the Government of the United States or any agency or instrumentality thereof.

[Peerie Maa]

[Paul Pless]

I believe you are about the only soul I have ever heard whine about the Hatch Act.

he is a pretty good troll

[L.W. Baxter]

Oh good, prehaps you can enlighten me about how your just and righteous democratic society protected itself from Paul Robeson, Joe Hill, Tom Mooney, Fred Hampton, Buffy Sainte-Marie, Arthur Miller, Robert Oppenheimer, Huey Newton, Julian Assange, Muhammad Ali, Edward Snowden and scores of others ?

I'm pretty sure you will manufacture some difference but to the unbiased eye, same-o same-o, captain.


You honestly do not have a clue about what the censorship bureau actually does. Which is to be expected I guess, since so few people know a damn thing about China (which doesn't stop anyone from running off at the mouth, unfortunately.)

well, that's quite a list. all but assange and snowden suffered their persecutions over forty years ago, and generally in the context of racial strife, world war, and the early years of the cold war. i don't defend abuses of authority then or now.

your contemporary examples, assange and snowden, are not wanted men in the u.s. for political expression, but for theft and publication of classified documents. if they stood trial for their crimes, the trial would be publicly reported. they would be free to defend themselves. their words in their own defense would be publicly disseminated.

if convicted, they would go to prison, where they would exercise their rights to appeal.

no one is punished for speaking freely about snowden or assange. there is no censorship of opinions about their behavior. there is no campaign by the u.s. government to erase their existence from history. you can publish a book about them that says anything you want. make a movie alleging government conspiracy against your heroes, write a song, paint a mural, draw a cartoon. you are free to lie about them and their experience at the hands of authorities. you may, of course, be run off reputable media. and you can be sued for slander or libel if your lies get too personal and specific.

no doubt the subject of this thread, alex jones, is one who has freely lied about snowden and assange and the u.s. government response. lots of airtime to fill, cognitive dissonance to traffic. lots of credulous rubes to sell stuff to. yes, he and his ilk get "deplatformed" from companies who don't want to be associated. but that is not an exercise of government authority.

our current executive administration is powerless even to limit the lies of the former guy, as he incites his mob to overthrow the constitution.

that's the extent of "censorship" in the u.s., a country in which the citizenry limit the power of the government to limit speech. which hardly means that there are no instances of abuse by authority, but there are real consequences for overreach, in our courts and at the polls.

feel free to tell us a bedtime story about the gentle hand of the ccp, and the power of the chinese citizenry to oversee--and change--their government.

[HRDavies]

I believe you are about the only soul I have ever heard whine about the Hatch Act.

You don't get out much, I guess ? It's been to the Supreme Court twice. Here's some interesting discussion about weaknesses and opponents --

https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/vi...71&context=ulj

Fordham Law, are they whiners as well ? About your paste being the act 'in toto", umm, you missed the part where federal employees and state employees of agencies that take federal money are also prohibited from joining subversive groups. That is the same as not allowing dissidents to speak.

But my point was not really this one piece of legislation. The US government has stomped on dissent ever since its beginning in many ways. Legislatively with the Alien and Sedition Act of 1798, Overman Committee, Fish Committee, Dies Committee, Smith Act, this Hatch thing, Joe McCarthy, House Unamerican Activities -- others I've missed I'm sure. By kangaroo courts and trumped-up charges leading to the execution of Joe Hill and lengthy imprisonment of Tom Mooney and doubtless others. By disinformation and disruption campaigns such as COINTELPRO leading to multiple deaths and the disintegration of dissident groups. Outright murders such as Fred Hampton. Clandestine smear campaigns and blacklisting of hundreds if not thousands of people, e.g. Martin Luther King and dozens of artists, singers, writers and probably just plain citizens .... The goal here is not hatred of the US government (altho I am not a big fan of hypocrisy) but to point out that all governments, from authoritarian dictatorships to enlightened liberal democracies, have always protected themselves. Even democratic Athens made Socrates drink the poison, no ?

So this holier-than-thou crap about "China censors dissidents" is sanctimonious, hypocritical, and basically stupid. Of course they do. These "dissidents" aim to overthrow the government. No government, ever, has given its prospective killers free license.

To take it a step further, I think Alex Jones and others should be censored. Not so that they can't speak, but at least to the point that they are not allowed to spew lies. In my opinion, this stuff about "we don't believe in censorship" is naive and stupid. The difficulty is in coming up with a rational approach to what gets censored, not the concept itself. (The "fire in a theater" example displays that you already agree with this, just won't admit it).

feel free to tell us a bedtime story about the gentle hand of the ccp, and the power of the chinese citizenry to oversee--and change--their government.

Can you get this through that block of concrete on your neck ? They don't want to change their government. They like their government. They hire professionals and expect them to do the job. It has done more good for the people of China in a mere seventy-five years than almost anyone anywhere ever. Of course there are occasions when things go south, this is planet earth, after all. But overall, Chinese people are pretty damn pleased with their lives and their country and yes, their government.

Beyond that, in fact it is easier for a Chinese person to speak to their government and be heard than it is for an American. Every single district in every single city has local officials who listen to local input. The governments of China are far more responsive to popular opinion than the US. They just temper it with rational thought and planning. That's why they have a civilization while you have chaos.

They even listen to foreigners. Been there, done that. That doesn't mean they do what I want but they listen, with both ears -- something no legislator in the US has been known to do, unless there's a photo op involved.

p.s. Why are my examples old ? Perhaps because the US has become more and more fascist over the past twenty years or so, so there's no real need ? Altho there were riots rather recently over the way you treat black people. Even here where y'all think you are enlightened liberals, the text is facism writ large -- in a kind of strange synthesis with virtue-signalling do-gooderism. Peculiar, imo. Oh well, it is what it is ...

[Keith Wilson]

The governments of China are far more responsive to popular opinion than the US. They just temper it with logical rational thought and planning. That's why they have a civilization while you have chaos.

Oh, my!



Well, there's something to be said for exposing one's true colors.

Note also how he has managed to derail the discussion of Alex Jones.

[L.W. Baxter]

Can you get this through that block of conrcrete on your neck ? They don't want to change their government. They like their government. They hire professionals and expect them to do the job. It has done more good for the people of China in a mere seventy-five years than almost anyone anywhere ever. Of course there are occasions when things go south, this is planet earth, after all. But overall, Chinese people are pretty damn pleased with their lives and their country and yes, their government.

Beyond that, in fact it is easier for a Chinese person to speak to their government and be heard than it is for an American. Every single district in every single city has local officials who listen to local input. The governments of China are far more responsive to popular opinion than the US. They just temper it with logical rational thought and planning. That's why they have a civilization while you have chaos.

They even listen to foreigners. Been there, done that. That doesn't mean they do what I want but they listen, with both ears -- something no legislator in the US has been known to do, unless there's a photo op involved.

lol. so, dissent is censored in china because there is no dissent in china.

and where there is obscurantism, and obviously manufactured "reality", there is no curiosity either, i suppose.

[HRDavies]

Note also how he has managed to derail the discussion of Alex Jones.

The discussion of Alex Jones is basically a discussion of censorship. Most of the posters here (all ?) want to censor Mr Jones. They just won't admit it because it is not politically correct. I'm pretty sure no one here wants lies and slander spread around.

Censorship has a place.

and where there is obscurantism, and obviously manufactured "reality", there is no curiosity either, i suppose.

Except I'm here and you are not. "Reality" is right outside my door but 8,000 miles away from you. What your "curiosity" leads to, by way of the US press, is a large steaming pile of bullpoop because you already "know" everything you are ever going to allow yourself to "know".

[L.W. Baxter]

Except I'm here and you are not. "Reality" is right outside my door but 8,000 miles away from you. What your "curiosity" leads to, by way of the US press, is a large steaming pile of bullpoop because you already "know" everything you are ever going to allow yourself to "know".

oh, reality is right outside my door, too.

and, from 8000 miles away, i can replay the video, right now, of hu jintao being escorted from the party congress. is that video readily available to the average resident of china? or even above average residents?

what do your chinese friends and neighbors say about the removal of hu jintao from the party congress? have you heard from hu lately?

i don't know what happened. but i can read the chinese state media twitter about it, that hu was "ill", and critically examine that claim against the visual evidence.

[Boatbum]

The discussion of Alex Jones is basically a discussion of censorship. Most of the posters here (all ?) want to censor Mr Jones. They just won't admit it because it is not politically correct. I'm pretty sure no one here wants lies and slander spread around.

Censorship has a place.


Except I'm here and you are not. "Reality" is right outside my door but 8,000 miles away from you. What your "curiosity" leads to, by way of the US press, is a large steaming pile of bullpoop because you already "know" everything you are ever going to allow yourself to "know".

I've pretty much stayed out of this discussion for two reasons:

1. Because I step in it enough already
and
2. I really don't care that much about Alex Jones or this thread

As a result I take a peek occasionally and move on. I am stunned to see how it has morphed into a thread on censorship and how China has become a bastion of free speech! That said......

The discussion of Alex Jones has nothing to do with censorship. He was, and still is, free to say whatever he wants. However, like all of us he can experience the consequence of his freedom if he says something that is libelous or incites violence or causes some kind of harm to others. Being free to say what you want does not insulate you from the consequences of that speech. What did not happen to him was the government coming to his house and dragging him into a jail because he said something that the government did not want him to say.

[Figment]

Note also how he has managed to derail the discussion of Alex Jones.

Takes two to tango. I count six in this dance.

[HRDavies]

and, from 8000 miles away, i can replay the video, right now, of hu jintao being escorted from the party congress. is that video readily available to the average resident of china? or even above average residents?

You are displaying your ignorance. And yes, it was on teevee ages ago when it happened and NO ONE in asia makes the ignorant mistakes that you people in the US do. No one in government would ever do what you mentally-compromised people think happened. Go ahead and ask Mr Craig-Bennet (since you obviously won't believe me).

EVER

https://mronline.org/2022/11/29/west...china-bashing/

[L.W. Baxter]

You are displaying your ignorance. And yes, it was on teevee ages ago when it happened and NO ONE in asia makes the ignorant mistakes that you people in the US do. No one in government would ever do what you mentally-compromised people think happened. Go ahead and ask Mr Craig-Bennet (since you obviously won't believe me).

EVER

https://mronline.org/2022/11/29/west...china-bashing/

yes, the video appeared on your tv.

can you legally watch it, right now? is it available for viewing, or not.

do you believe the state media, that he was escorted out due to illness?

[HRDavies]

What did not happen to him was the government coming to his house and dragging him into a jail because he said something that the government did not want him to say.

Doesn't happen in China either. First thing is your wechat account gets taken down, then they tell you to shut up, then if you insist they make you stay home. At the very end of the road you escape to the US where you make a career travelling around giving anti-communist speeches.

How do you think you know about all these "dissidents" if they are all in jail ?

This as opposed to what happened to Fred Hampton, who was blown away in his bed with his pregnant wife right next to him. And then the cops lied about it for the next twenty years.

[Gerarddm]

China is a totalitarian surveillance state. The US is not, and unless Drumpf gets back in, won't be.

I think that pretty much sums it up, yeh?

[TomF]

If I might, I launched this thread to talk about Alex Jones' day in court, and the consequences he's facing for having been found to have intentionally lied about the shootings of schoolchildren. To have got obscene amounts of money from monetizing that pain, that lie.

Please discuss authoritarianism elsewhere. It's free to start one's own thread, eh?

[birlinn]

^seconded.

[L.W. Baxter]

huh. how about them apples. censored by a canadian, the chinese and the americans both.

this is going to free up alot of my time. just need dr. jung to tell me what i can't post on the ukraine thread and i can avoid the wbf entirely for the rest of the week.

[TomF]

I've started a couple of other threads this morning for you to peruse, Lee. We Canadians are thoughtful like that.

[LeeG]

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/d...of-conspiracy/

[George Jung]

huh. how about them apples. censored by a canadian, the chinese and the americans both.

this is going to free up alot of my time. just need dr. jung to tell me what i can't post on the ukraine thread and i can avoid the wbf entirely for the rest of the week.

Not sure how I got dragged into this - but FTR - you post to your lil' hearts content, LW!

I got yer back.

[Keith Wilson]

They like their government. They hire professionals and expect them to do the job. It has done more good for the people of China in a mere seventy-five years than almost anyone anywhere ever. Of course there are occasions when things go south, this is planet earth, after all.

Since I have Mr Davies on my ignore list, I missed this, but it deserves at least a brief reply. The artificially-created famine of the 'Great Leap Forward' killed some 40+ million people, one of the worst mass murders in all of human history. The Cultural Revolution was responsible for another million or so, and the invasion and annexation of Tibet quite a few more.

Now, the Great Leap Forward was 1958-62, and the Cultural Revolution from '66 to '76, a good while ago. Fortunately things are different now - but '75 years' includes a very large pile of corpses.

But this has nothing at all to do with Mr. Jones, and probably should be on another thread.

[HRDavies]

yes, the video appeared on your tv.

But you just said it didn't

can you legally watch it, right now? is it available for viewing, or not.

If I could find it, sure. Probably on bilbili or weixin somewhere but I am not talented enough to get through the 48,000 cute cat videos to search it out.

do you believe the state media, that he was escorted out due to illness?

Most certanly, because I have an idea how China works. No way in hell would something like that ever go on teevee if it were as the western press reports it. NEVER. That would be like the pope pulling his cassock up and jacking off in the middle of communion. Just would not happen, ever.

I'm going to assume good faith here, because how the hell would any of you know anything about China ? But it is not how you imagine it.

It is not just like the west except with slanty eyes. The entire civilization functions differently. They don't do the two-sides, compete to see which is best, ideology, DA and defense, left wing - right wing winner take all thing. It totally is not structured that way. The things the western press claims happen just are not possible in a Chinese environment.

That is not to say "this is Utopia", it's not. But neither is it what the west portrays.

One thing is, appearances are very very important. That's one reason you will never ever see what you think you saw. Hu Jintao is old, and he's most likely losing it mentally. But it is important for appearances that he's still included. All China people will understand this, many of them have a grandpa who is not all there anymore either. If they don't, the wife does. Or the next-door-neighbor. It's tight here, you can't get away from people, there's 26 million or something just in this one city. You can't have open disagreements (they do, but not on a large scale).

Life is different in China. No way would Mr Xi ever dis Mr Hu in public. Ever. When there are real battles, the loser gets a stomach ailment or his wife gets some obscure disease so he isn't seen in public anymore, has to stay home, so sorry, not well.

Another misunderstanding is the censorship thing. It's not mainly political. There isn't that much politics, not in the sense that there is in the US. People will have personal opinions on people and policies but there's not that left-right, labor-management, owner-slave relationship that the US has. People don't hate so-and-so like you do because "he's a republican" or a hard-liner or any of that. They may dislike so-and-so because he implemented a policy that caused them to lose money, but not on an ideological level.

How many people here participated in usenet ? Every single usenet group I ever read was eventually desroyed by a couple of jerks. Now we have moderated forums, which most people think is better, no ? That is the major job of the media censors. You would not believe the firefights that boyband fans get into. The censors stop that. Movie star fans are out of control insane. The censors stop that. Government is supposed to be serene and cooperative. The censors enforce that image. Teevee and web productions have to be approved before they can be released ... this is similar to the Hayes Code. They mostly want inspirational type shows, not sadistic of violent or negative messages. It's kind of saccharine but maybe okay. One of the things that is important to the civiliztion is the fiction that we are all good people working together with the best interests of the society in mind. To an extent that is true but even more important, the image creates the reality (to an extent).

This ain't the US. There are five times as many people in even less habitable space. They do not have the luxury of pretending to be Marlboro Men. ("Freedom" is a big myth in the US as well but you all believe it, no point in my attempting to deconstruct that silliness). China people are way more independent and free in their individual lives than any Americans I know, but they play by different rules in public. When they tried doing things the western way it was a total disaster for more than a hundred years. Liberal democracy does not work in a Chinese environment, and the vast majority of people here know that and do not want it. The warlord chaos is not something they want to return to.

Giraffes need a different environment than penguins. Try to force either one to be the other and all you'll have is a giant disaster.

The thing about this that is infuriatig is, what's wrong with you people ? Chinese people don't try to tell you what to do or how to live. Why can't you allow them to do things the way they want ? All this propaganda is just so much stupid diarrhea, ignorant crap that has nothing to do with reality. Why do you insist on it ? The tiniest bit of logical observation will show you it's garbage.

[Boatbum]

So glad I have not been a part of this thread. It has gone completely off the rails

[Keith Wilson]

Mr Davies, I have a request. I know a little about China. You obviously know a lot more than I do, and whether you're right or wrong, you make some interesting points, and I could learn something from your posts. I'd guess that what you write would be a lot better received, and it'd certainty be more pleasant to read, if you wouldn't yell at people and call them idiots. Insults rarely help anything, accurate or not.

[L.W. Baxter]

very interesting essay, hr, from an alternative perspective. and yes, better for lacking insults.

and i don't find it that far off from the original topic. hr describes a society where alex jones simply would not have a platform, period. likely would have been shut down the first time he questioned the shared reality of what happened at sandy hook. that much is certainly clear. and the question before us might be, is that form of society, on the whole, better or worse for humankind?

sure seems like we want to shut jones's pie hole. i know i do.

[Osborne Russell]

btw, are you dissident-supporting censorship-haters aware of the Hatch Act ? Or any of the other legislative acts specifically banning and penalizing dissent in the US ?

There aren't any.

[Osborne Russell]

Somewhat ironic that the owner of Twitter and richest man in the world, does not know what free speech means. Makes one feel less alone.

Who in the USA is being censored?

Twitter cancelling an account is an excercise of the right of property. They can make a careful years-long process out of cancelling people, or they can tack the customer list to the wall an throw darts at it.

Alex Jones is not being censored.