StephenP wrote: ↑
Fri Feb 14, 2020 12:27 am
Scott, I talked about the Amazon issue in this post:
In essence what I said is that Amazon is not required to carry content they don't want to sell. I also said the books are still available.
I need to get up early so I'm done for the evening.
Thanks, Stephen. These ideas are all related and seem to cross threads, and it is hard to keep the dialog straight even with the best of intentions.
Anyway, the problem with Amazon is that soft-power or soft-censorship is still censorship. Also, Amazon and Bezos are being incredibly disingenuous, at best, as is argued in the 39 minute Revisionist video (linked above), which I recommend that everybody watch.
Amazon has become an effective monopoly, and even Academic Libraries are using their platforms to the exclusion of other catalogs and systems. Silicon Valley is hugely in bed with what I call Corporate Globohomo; this is where all the old-school Communists ended up. Now we have the descendants of "red diaper babies" sipping overpriced lattes and wearing rainbow Che T-shirts while fighting straight, White males and their trophy wives, from their laptops and fake news flagships.
To let these drones be the gatekeepers of speech on the Internet is no different from the government saying, hey, we don't like this guy's heretic views--he signs the cross backwards or something
. So the utility company is then obligated to cut off his services either by force of etiquette, custom, or by outright law which provides corporate cover. These Thoughtcriminals could
someday be guilty of violent acts, so "we" have to "reclaim the conversation."
I also have a degree in History and an interest in historiography and epistemological methods. That is why I became interested in Revisionism many decades ago-- although Nessie says that no Denier on this board has one. (I assume Nessie is saying that since I am colleague with a History sheepskin that I'm not a Denier, LOL.) I might agree at least that the Denier terminology is meaningless, except perhaps in questions of theology, which is precisely where Lipstadt is coming from. Unlike Lipstadt, however, I do not think that Jews own
History, nor should they.
Historiography, including revisionism (small r), is best looked at as a process similar to the Scientific Method. History is also an Art in that there are different values and perspectives at play. But even in very Hard Sciences like Chemistry there can be very theoretical and very reductionist elements. As I like to say, History is not a monolith.
Anyway, I don't teach and I rarely have contact with students, which I used to supervise. If I did I would not be able to air the opinions, the views, or host debates on controversial issues like I do--especially those views that are banned or even criminalized in some countries.
When I started at the Scottsdale Public Library decades ago I had to be fingerprinted in case I had contact with kiddies. Now they promote Drag Queen Story Hour to MAKE SURE that kiddies have exposure to perverts in Public Libraries and so on.
What has changed? Cultural Marxists now openly run our educational institutions; they no longer need to hide it, and they are no longer very tolerant of dissent like open-debate if it might involve a populist White reaction, such that elected Trump with over 50 percent of White men and even the majority of White women voting for him in 2016.
Many "New Deal Democrats" voted for Trump, but for the most part Liberal professionals did not. I know a lot of people involved in Education at every level from elementary to academic, and as Upton Sinclair once quipped, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on his NOT understanding it.”
The important thing here is not that everyone agrees with me. That is why Nessie is actually a valuable member of this board, contrary to what I often hear.
One of the philosophies behind this forum is that we don't all have to agree. We just have to be able to agree that we can have a robust dialog and let the chips land where they do. People like James Madison would have called this a marketplace-of-ideas, and that it will flourish in an environment of fresh air to use his metaphor. Others like Dr. Lipstadt believe that hot-air is a very toxic and dangerous place to be.
I for one prefer that organizations like the ADL and the SPLC, AIPAC, etc. not be the gatekeepers of good speech, double-plus-good or otherwise.
Leftists think that the free-speech of the Right is literal violence, but that their own literal violence is free-speech. That is where we are basically with the First Amendment at this time.
My ex-girlfriend was a UK Librarian who had a degree from UC Berkeley and she took part in the anti-Apartheid protests in the 1980s. Well, back then, if you were a hippie or were anti-White in some respect, the system protected your rights of speech and assembly. Even costume Nazis were allowed to march in Illinois in the 1970s. The Blues Brothers even mocked this.
Well, the times have changed today because the System IS the counter-culture, and former free-speech dissidents, draft-dodgers, hippies, and nerds like Bezos are the new enforcers--and if the soft-power from his Washington Post
or his Amazon book ban doesn't shut the "racists" up, the rack and the gibbet of the Inquisition is right around the corner.
I am not a supporter of boycott-Israel movements--just not an issue that I care about as an American Isolationist--but these causes and their speakers have already been deplatformed in countries where they are not necessarily thrown into jail outright. It is against state and federal law to sell services, such as on University campuses, to people who support a boycott of Israel on the basis that it is a racist regime. Jews can't be racists. That would be anti-Semitic. And though this particular law will not be held up in the courts just yet, it portents to an Evil future for Western Civilization, where intellectual orthodoxy is what they teach in the schools on pain of forte et dure
, as they used to say.
To suggest, as former President Jimmy Carter did, that Israel is an "Apartheid" state is pretty much the definition of anti-Semitism, and likely anybody with less stature than he as a good Liberal and non-Hater would have been crucified for it.
At the present time, only good Leftists like Fritjof Meyer or system apparatchiks like Franciszek Piper can credibly lower the statistics for deaths at former Nazi Death Camps. When they do, this begs the question as to where did those Jews went (who no longer died).