Bret Weinstein has been demonetized by “FaceTube”

_{Denyse O'Leary

June 29, 2021

Atheism, Education}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

No, not a typo: Facebook and Youtube are not much different, really.

Facebook dumped Bret Weinstein and now YouTube has demonetized him:

Weinstein, whatever you may think about his enthusiasm for… Darwinism, was serious as a biology teacher at Evergreen State. And here’s what happened when he confronted the Raging Woke about one of their pro-illiteracy demands:

Weinstein didn’t realize that atheism today means illiteracy, innumeracy, and total control by the biggest totalitarian power — with no appeal. 2 + 2 better make 5. Atheism has no values to defend. Literacy and numeracy is just an accident.

Maybe Weinstein wouldn’t be an atheist if he understood the stakes more clearly.

See also: Yes, there really is a war on math in our schools. Pundits differ as to the causes but here are some facts parents should know.

Comments

Here’s an example of someone (Alex Berenson) making a small fortune by monetizing his work on Twitter and Substrack. He has written several booklets, each for $1.99 about C19 and just tells the truth. So the Twitter account which presents facts and lies/distortions about his work and his Substrack articles which are more substantive act as feeds into his sale of booklets. https://twitter.com/alexberenson https://uncommondescent.com/ud-newswatch-highlights/breaking-president-trump-mrs-trump-ms-hicks-are-positive-for-cv-19/#comment-733486 Someone will fill this need for ID but the content has to be just science that understandable to the common person and never mention God or religion. It will not generate nearly as much money in the short term as C19 but in the long run could be very profitable.jerry_{June 30, 2021
June
06
Jun
30
30
2021
06:41 AM
6
06
41
AM
PDT}

AS78 and Polistra, the problem lies in the history. Key vid repository and wider social media sites built their network dominance on the platform model, which in the US involves Section 230 on defamation etc exemptions and protections. Some of the key pioneers who fed growth to dominance have now been driven out, marginalised, demonetised etc, now that ideological agendas have crept in under excuses that do not bear scrutiny. Some could argue, hidden long term agenda. (A model for Internet evolution driven by open source blogs, local hosting of sites [based on open source technology and things like WordPress as a Content Management system], subscription based e-magazines etc would not have had the structure we see instead. For instance, the heavy emphasis on video and bandwidth-intensive multimedia etc we see likely would not be there. As it is, I think a lot of people will switch to that sort of model, and may even go back to paper.) Several of these sites became de facto e-town public squares. Had they not used the platform model and protections, they simply would not have gained monopoly or oligopoly power, which carries with it censorship powers. Then, the switcheroo became a part of the info battle-space in the ongoing 4th gen civil war in the US, which is a facet of the wider 4th gen global WW4, a second cold war. The proper legal solution is to break up monopolies and/or to declare utility status with tighter regulation under Sect 230 or equivalent. However the politics of manipulative elections, propagandistic major media and courts playing with the fire of legislating from the bench or locking out unwelcome petitioners, frustrates such. No good will come of this, with sobering geostrategic consequences. KFkairosfocus_{June 30, 2021
June
06
Jun
30
30
2021
02:35 AM
2
02
35
AM
PDT}

Demonetizing is NOT the same thing as censorship. Dissidents have never expected to be PAID by the establishment newspapers or TV stations.polistra_{June 29, 2021
June
06
Jun
29
29
2021
01:13 PM
1
01
13
PM
PDT}

Wish I had this a month ago when I was arguing with someone on Biden’s Facebook on the current state of cancel culture. He claimed it didn’t exist and I had brought Bret Weinstein as an example that it very much existsAaronS1978_{June 29, 2021
June
06
Jun
29
29
2021
09:52 AM
9
09
52
AM
PDT}

A lot of authors, not necessarily conservative or religious have been attacked/demonetized by Facebook, Google and Twitter. They are going to forums such as Substack and locals which is subscription based. Or they are like Bill O’Reilly setting up their own subscription website. On of the problems is each cost a fair amount so it’s prohibitive to subscribe to more than one or two.jerry_{June 29, 2021
June
06
Jun
29
29
2021
08:42 AM
8
08
42
AM
PDT}

Whatever, everyone is corrupt, including the religious. They are all fact obsessed, and do not accept the validity of the concept of personal opinion. So then freedom of opinion is out the window.mohammadnursyamsu_{June 29, 2021
June
06
Jun
29
29
2021
08:40 AM
8
08
40
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply