So, I’ve been excommunicated from Michael Shellenberger’s global anti-censorship movement. It’s my own fault. I was sowing dissension. I engaged in harmful speech in the group chat. I was making people feel uncomfortable. I was not playing ball. I was not with the program.
As one of the millions of “nobodys” out there, I would prefer not to have anyone who was pro-lockdown, pro-mandate, pro-jab “endorse” an anti-censorship declaration. People who say things like “fuck your freedom” are not the kind who truly believe that censorship is a problem. But hey that’s just me. I also don’t think that Elon just “let” the Twitter files out because he’s a swell guy. An “everything app” sure sounds like it has great potential to censor and control its users. But like I said, I’m just one of millions of nobodies. Hope the Germans aren’t getting you too down CJ. Offspring of the diaspora so I can say that 😉
I try not to let anything get me too down. It helps to remember that this is just a short, weird ride, and that my personal problems "don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world," and so on.
There should be three little dots in a row on the bottom right of your post, on the same line as Like, Reply, and Share. Click on the dots, and you'll find that a little menu pops up, and one of the items is Edit...
Anyone who uses censorship - which I beleive Sasha did, is suspect. Better to spend no time caring about what they have to say. Let's give our attention (thus our energy, our electricity) to those who have the courage to speak out with courage.
You ‘BELIEVE’ Sasha did use censorship and is suspect. What amazing intellect you have. What you did was read a poorly worded post and jumped on the bandwagon of ‘let’s get the censorship suspect.’ The “suspect” happens to be someone you have never heard of before. She also happens to be one of the bravest, most outspoken and intelligent people on the planet.
Then 8 people who are also idiots, hopped on your doomed bandwagon with likes. Next, Lizzie Cable wants a list of “such people.”
This is a thread on the great CJ Hopkins Substack.
Yeah, I was wondering what denise ward was on about with the "which I beleive Sasha did," comment. Maybe there is a Substack controversy to which I am obliviously ignorant.
This is perfect. Someone needs to create a "How to tap out a troll in under 10 seconds w/ Judith Chantler" Instructional video.
You hit every mark.
Just for other's education, I'm going to do a quick tactic analysis in the hopes that that Instructional video gets made.
Tactics used-
1. Non ad hominem attack on the troll. Once a person references their belief, opinion, judgement etc in an argument, they are no longer the messenger. They have now self identified as the expert supporting their position. Question and Refute whatever trait they are relying on to subjectively support that position. Show that they lack the resource they claim.
2. Find their errors, present them, but do not explain their errors to them. (If Denise ever reads this, then I am breaking the no teaching the enemy rule, but it is worth it.)
Denise's error was to read the last 5 words of Wendel's comment and gamble on them referencing a singular entity. "WEF mole. See Sasha Latypova" Sasha is a damn good investigative journalist and pharma expert, not the WEF Mole using censorship. A simple copy and paste search of the name would have prevented this error. This is a failure to do even the lowest effort diligence before entering the fray. Pathetic and Judith gets a clean head shot for it.
"What you did was read a poorly worded post and jumped on the bandwagon of ‘let’s get the censorship suspect.’ The “suspect” happens to be someone you have never heard of before."
Judith was able to extrapolate this take down from that one, unforced error. Most importantly, notice the lack of correction or even bio info presented along with take down. This way, Denise leaves the argument only knowing that Judith somehow knew that she had not done even the most cursory review of the topic prior to commenting. Learns nothing from the self inflicted L, but potentially (Hopefully) gains an anxiety of possible future prescient rebuttals.
3. Embarrass their thoughtless supporters. Those people who liked that comment, now have a solid reason to feel that Denise has utterly failed them. They don't know exactly how, but they do know that they have become somehow lessened in the public opinion. They absolutely are idiots for the knee jerk public support of such a flawed comment, but they will blame the injury on Denise. The quality of character it takes to see when one has only themself to blame for a social injury, precludes those who jump, in total ignorance of the topic at hand, to support a position.
Bonus lesson, can anyone point out the grade school tactic Denise crafted her comment around? It's a logical bait and switch.
Appear to support the thesis, "Anyone who uses censorship... is suspect" (censorship bad), then suggest the antithesis as a solution, " Better to spend no time caring about what they have to say" (self-censor them, censorship good). Juvenile but often effective in shifting the Overton Window.
That's a good question but I read it somewhere and can't place who said it now. I read it by someone that claimed you censored them. I was surprised I must admit however free speech can enable all of us to defend ourselves if someone makes claims that are untrue. That's the beauty of free speech. I don't think I'll be able to trace it back as I read a lot of stuff. But it will help me ask more questions when a claim is made like that. Sorry if it is inaccurate.
ok, so maybe if you don't have evidence then you should not write this stuff about me? I ban trolls from my page, and people who are rude to me or my readers. That's not censorship since I am not government, by the way.
Ok so Sasha dear, that's censoring. You can't ban anyone let alone people you claim are trolls. That's the thing about free speech, you can't be half pregnant about it. No if you allow yourself to do it but not government then that's a double standard. And it goes the same way if you allow government to do things but not your peers, (like stealing for example) This person you call a troll was actually quite genuine. I get that too, people call me a troll but I just want to seek truth and it makes people feel uncomfortable so they think slapping on a name to it is justification. I think this idea of free speech and censorship needs to be ironed out or we're going to get trounced. What is harmful about words written on a screen? It is the one place we can be truly free and you're throwing that away. for us. That endangers my life and everyone's life because if we succumb to censorship for any reason, except maybe someone who is going to report us, or someone who makes threats against us, then it will give consent for government to censor and big tech. There is way too much sensitivity to words on a screen. This is where we must talk openly and freely and not accuse someone and shut them off. I notice that's what always happens - the censor wants their say but denies someone from having their say. Your readers can make up their own minds. Censorship keeps us in the supremacy paradigm and holds us back and that will only fuel the ghouls who want to kill us all. Free speech is all we've got. We have nothing else and they have everything. Why be on the side they're on? Just because someone doesn't say things your way? You can always ignore them too. But to cut off someone's expression should be considered a crime - it's THAT crucial. We are in dangerous waters enough. Why make us sink lower?
"That's a good question but I read it somewhere and can't place who said it now. I read it by someone that claimed you censored them. I was surprised I must admit however free speech can enable all of us to defend ourselves if someone makes claims that are untrue."
In other words an unsubstantiated accusation. These days in particular we should be very careful and avoid that.
Well we should only give our attention to those who uphold free speech but we should have a list of those who censor. For sure, and highlight those who censor so others won't have to waste their time with them. When I found out Sasha censors, I didn't spend any more time listening to her. What is the point of it being one-sided? That's what we have now so it is remaining the same way will only give us the same results with just different people. It's still tyranny. We all want to be heard. It's important to use the Golden Rule. We cannot progress without free speech. It's of the utmost importance. It slays me how so many just toss it away. What it means is we consent to censorship and thus the overlords will continue to do it to us! But if we revile censorship and practice free speech, it won't be so easy for them to do it to us then.
I get you and you have a point. I think what would be even better would be to have a list of anyone who censors especially those who call themselves truthers. I have a list like that. Sarah Westall is one and there are many others, many of them on substack. I think if we highlighted those who censor then other activists shouldn't bother with them. They just want to have their say but not give the same graciousness to others. We must uphold free speech with all our might as it is of critical importance. It is the vehicle that will enable us to get through all this and start a whole free world. We cannot be free if we cannot speak freely. Anyone can rebutt if something is found to be untrue but to censor must be vigorously disgraced.
Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad, Ezra Levant -- all three censored the participation of Faith Goldy in a seminar about... get this... how society is censoring free speech -- a seminar they had invited her to participate in!!!
Ladies... ladies... is this how you want to reflect your true character, by ignoring the verses that Jesus taught, “to love your neighbor as you love yourself?” “to forgive and forget” as He claims “justice is His!”
How ‘bout “turning the other cheek?”
Both of you appear to be bright, intelligent women who care deeply about the causes for which you give voice to but, in all actuality, you are censoring yourselves when you write this kind of drivel in an uncouth and demeaning way because no one wants to read such horrific spiteful things no matter who it’s coming from.
As women, shouldn’t we support each other instead of tearing each other down???
As the song so beautifully says, please... “Straighten Up and Fly Right!”
I wish I could be candid about what I think about superstition both religion and $ceince. So what actually are you saying - that people cannot disagree? What do you do when you disagree with someone? Sweep it under the carpet? But do tell, because it's interesting that you brought it up, this forced "niceness" where we all have to agree. But agree with who and with what? The status quo? The older person? The more monies person? Who should sweep their opinion under the carpet? Because someone has to if we cannot accept disagreement.
I mean that Elon Musk employs a WEF mole now who has censored Sasha Latypova. I wrote “see Sasha Latypova” because she commented on that. I ABSOLUTELY did NOT imply that Sasha practised censorship!! Anybody who reads her work should know how absurd that would be!
I meant that you were censored by Twitter. You are one of my go to writers. My sincere apologies if I gave the impression that you yourself indulged in censoring people!
I think Elon was pissed that he had to get the jab, which made him feel like he was dying. Even as the richest man in the world, he had to stoop as low as the plebs.
I would not believe anything they do in front of the public is true. It's all a stage act. I'd rather err on the side of thinking this than imagine that a man who has billions cannot at least provide wells to Africans with all that money and actually do something that does help humanity.
Had you employed the qualifying word "allegedly" immediately in front of "the richest man in the world", accuracy in presentation would have been amplified. One only need do some research on a particular privately-owned bank in City of London to come to some level of depth understanding. Please, never take "popular" postulations for granite.
You ARE somebody! Of course you are. You are one of many somebodies. Together we make the whole. But we are all different and that is how nature intended, that is what is good. Whether famous or not, we each are unique and that diversity is what nature figured out that is actually a safeguard. I agree with you on your interpretation that anyone who is pro those factors is that they themselves wish to control.
People come around, don't they? I mean, even those of you reading CJ's substack may have ... oh, I don't know, sanitized your groceries, stood just "far away enough" from someone, or had the thought that if everyone would just stay home, we'd be done with this by now.
"The simple fact is, playing by the rules of the system and the “reality” you claim to be opposing a recipe for failure."
Exactly! The rule to maintain status these days means you MUST go along with the sick and twisted narrative or be bullied, cancelled, accused, jailed, disappeared. Those of us without high status (except for the status we enjoy by being decent people with integrity) aren't subject to this manipulation. The idea of trying to get big names on the list is a strategy that speaks to the cluelessness of Shellenberger's plan. Just have the people sign....the millions of us that make this world go round and get the entire nightmare picture. There is no reaching the compromised at the top of this nightmare (they care too much for their big name reputation), but millions of us 'common man' MIGHT influence the other 50% of the population that we really need to reach.
I've noticed the Alt-Sphere has generated a kind of internal hierarchy, where the more well known, more influential and (likely) wealthier up towards the top tend to be more cautious and Mainstream, to the point where they have created a kind of "Mini-Mainstream" reflecting the broader Mainstream throughout the West. Why they do this may have more than one reason, ranging from the innocent personal quirk of simply having the personality that doesn't like conspiracy theory, all the way to the controlled opposition -- and of course a spectrum in between. where would be situated garden-variety corruption/greed. The problem with the Great Unwashed near the low end of the hierarchy (where I dwell) is that many of them seem to be batshit crazy.
The Canadian trucker convoy was a perfect example of a groundswell of support that quickly grew out of the control of any of the organizers. They repeatedly spoke of their amazement that their rather spontaneous and loosely organized plans for driving to Ottawa drew such a massive groundswell of support as people came in droves to cheer them on from the roads and bridges all across Canada. The authoritarians were legitimately threatened.
Yeah, those two little Dick-Taters currently running Canuckistan have granted that new monicker to a land with the words "true north brave and free" in its propounded escutcheon.
"the masses are not your employees. And they aren’t CGI extras in your narcissistic movie. They are actual living, breathing people, people who do not need us to lead them. Basically, the masses don’t give a shit what Richard Dawkins and Slavoj Žižek endorse."
Absolutely.
The dystopia that is planned for us is not going to be resisted by a petition signed by Richard sodding Dawkins. It's going to be resisted by actions like this:
Though it would be disgusting for the prole cleanup crew...perhaps even more telling than destroying those looming spy-gadgets...would be for various proles to gather up plenty of fetid feces, human and otherwise...and cast droppings and drippings right at the lenses. Of course, should the individuals be "properly" masked to prevent possible shedding, videos of the fun n' games would be apropos. Viral counterattack, baby.
Gotcha. Point is that the video, particularly if carefully choreographed, is something they could never "clean it up". Too bad that odors, per se, cannot be videoed...however, if those who do the deed put on a good "phew" presentation, the point would be made. Also, it could include masked individuals packaging of doggie-droppings, etc. That would be a form of activist jiu-jitsu, using their own devious imperatives against them. Imaginative actions with no violins involved would not be a turn-off for the general public and even if the Gestapo types get into one of their little acts, results in court would likely resolve in fines...which could be financed by people contributing to the cause. Solidarity, Amigo. When oppressed people get folks laughing rather than crying in their beers, the ballgame is soon over.
While it’s good that both Matt and Mike are waking up, it’s still early for them. It’s like they sometimes forget that it’s not just that things have changed, it’s that they were never what we thought they were. Matt will ask “what happened” and “how did we get here” but he forgets that the past was a lie and he’s asking the wrong questions.
People seem to not think too much about the saying that it is the victors who write the history books.
There is no statement being made on the veracity of those history books, except for that the losers' view is likely not in it. The victors history books tell you what the victors want you to 'know'.
And, most importantly, the mere fact that he would disrespect CJ Hopkins, who stands on his own. Blessed be he-long may he pester, as the great gadfly of our generation! Socrates had enemies within his own ranks, too...
In a chapter in one of his books, Matt Taibbi made malicious fun trashing people that investigate 9/11. Has he ever renounced that act or does he still go along with the discredited story that bin Laden and al-Qaeda did it? What about Mike's view of 9/11? To understand the roots of governance through emergency measures, it is necessary to study the extensive transformations brought about by the 9/11 deceptions. The deal with 9/11 is that you are not allowed to be a Very Important Person if you insist on investigating this crucial episode in twenty-first century geopolitics. And if you avoid the investigative process or just do it privately but keep your mouth closed so MSM continues to call, then your Big Picture analysis is pretty much shit. And you are exposed as a fake to those of us who have made the necessary investigations followed by forthright public conclusions.
Taibbi provides me with many sends. They are most frequently naught but teasers. To get to the meat of his perhaps informative message, one must first pass his pay-wall. I know that jet travel and nice hotels are very pricey these days. However, most of us simply cannot afford that shit...and considering the negative environmental effects of such antics should also be plumbed by those who have been semi-deplatformed by the PTB.
Matt, in case you happen to view this posting, I'm talking to you.
The worst ones out there do the limited-hangout bit. Your insight into him getting those tail feathers ruffled is more likely the case. Thus my judgement would be that like many another ex media maven, he has only partially awakened. Long-term, sometimes a single step can lead to a thousand mile march. Maybe not gonna happen in this instance, but maybe, just maybe something more along the line will induce him to open BOTH eyes. Point is, he was living a life of acclaim and quasi-luxury and it's hard to adjust to wake-up call reality.
The proof of Michael’s foibles has been staring everyone on Substack in the face for months....
I’m sorry, but if you are genuinely interested in building a movement, that anyone with his obvious intelligence must realise needs to be grassroots as it can be, you do not implement 100% paywall, as he has been for quite some time now. How do I get anyone else interested in it if they can’t engage with the material without forking out first?
At least Taibbi, Aaron Mate, Lee Fang etc, if it is a real humdinger story and of genuine importance to humanity, they unpaywall with a fair amount of consistency. Or, release enough of the story to get a decent feel for it before the paywall kicks in.
Public is like a coin slot peep show - just enough to pique the curiosity before the meat and potatoes are shown, when down slams the latch.
Plus, his opinion of the little people is self evident in his writing on homelessness, which literally makes you feel like he’s talking about a cockroach problem in SF.
Noble intentions, paving and the lake of fire. Mike hasn’t caught on that how you do it is of equal import to the end result, if not more. But then, he’ll have been taught eyes on the prize all his school life.
As always CJ, your honesty is deeply appreciated. Can we have an old school giggle.....?
I always think that if something is imperative to get out to the masses you wouldn't charge for it. But what do I know, being a nobody? Imagine if the founding fathers kept their movement behind a paywall?
We’re all somebody and nobody. And i get it - he has mouths to feed i expect, employees and all that. But if you are looking to affect change, well, you got to represent the change. At least a little.
I probably shouldn’t out this one, but my suspicion first piqued when MT nearly always called him by his surname on his pod, but everyone else (Lee Fang, Aaron Mate, CJ Hopkins and on and on got the full name treatment)
I hope he succeeds, all that said. The thing is way bigger, but I have my doubts.
Paywalls are a dead giveaway. Any author putting up paywalls is too self-centered to be a leader for freedom. Fake leaders are everywhere. Some are groomed (think Bob, Jr.), others just kind of naturally assume the mantel.
Please do not invoke the "founding fathers". By doing so, you immediately limit your reach to just those that live in a certain part of the world. Plus they made sure to install a 'Democracy', where the 'Electoral College' has the last word and did not include women or slaves.
Personally, I think the Electoral College is genius. It keeps major cities from controlling elections over and over. As to the US "Republic" not including women and slaves upon its founding, can you direct me to any other Republics during that time that did include women and slaves? I admit being ignorant on that fact.
My point was that there was a revolution in thought, and government, and it wasn't only available to those that coughed up some dough.
"Founding Fathers" As a Canadian, when I see that phrase I think of the fact that my country emerged from those who did not go along with the "Founding Fathers" but who rallied around King George and the British Empire. The Declaration of Independence makes a ridiculous cartoon character out of King George III. Until Trudeau became PM, Canada was a pretty decent country that was able to shape our constitutional monarchy into a system that served the citizenry reasonably well. I see the Indian leader Tecumseh, martyred by the US military, as one of Canada's primary founders. For an explanation please see my book
"... where the 'Electoral College' has the last word and did not include women or slaves"
In 1787. Could you tell me which people *with power* at that time were not -- by today's standards -- abusing it? Far from being at the bottom of the barrel, collectively, they seem to have been at the top of it.
The paywall sometimes just affects whether you're allowed to comment or not. I can understand the reason for this but it is very much like having a mask suddenly slapped across your face. One's voice is suddenly stifled.
Blocking and the varying degrees of banning are a continuation of this. Although, again, I can understand that at times the necessity for it. But what I'm noticing is 'it' can keep the author from having to be transparent and honest with themselves or others.
It also seems to intensify the need for belonging in the group, the followers. It echoes the group dynamic of 'we need to get jabbed for the common good'. 'I need to belong and must not question' dynamic.
Yeah this is the piece. People talk about cancel culture and the devastation of mask wearing on so many levels. And yet there is so much judgement and cancelling just deeply ingrained in 'us'.
Yes paying for the right to speak or paying for info about what's happening when so many have had opportunities just yanked from them.
That's why I decided to just request donations, although heaven knows I could use a few bucks. 😄 Part of it's just that my other obligations make posting regularly difficult, but the other is that I want people to think about what I'm saying, so I'll leave it up to them whether they think it's worth a tip.
Polite conversation on an open forum isn't easy, but ignoring and/or warning the disruptors is part of maintaining the desired culture. I agree it's a struggle sometimes reminding myself it can't be personal if the person doesn't actually know me. 😉
Exactly—that's how I set up Stronghold Too. Everything's there for the world to read, such as it is. If people want to subscribe, I'll be delighted. If they just want to drop a buck or three into the tip-jar, that's lovely, too. Otherwise, I'll settle for polite conversation. 😄
I've been wondering about the idea of polite conversation. If I'm feeling super reactive and defensive I like to pull back and not go there. Possibly I fail at times.
But what is the appropriate etiquette for this 'moment' in time.
I know, I know... don't get reactive and defensive and never ever share feelings (that was maybe more sarcastic). If you're falling down a deep dark well and this is the tenth time today, please just do it with a smile on your face (argh... more sarcasm)
By the way, I have been sending notes to people that I do not respect paywall requirements for commenting or for reading "the real meat of the message."
Ding ding ding! Bingo. Narcissistic bullshit. Mike is a schlub with an ego the size of the state of CA. I wouldn't trust him to run a kids effing candy store! Such bloody childish behavior. Good on you, CJ. 100 percent!
Well, just your average US citizen here who cares a whole lot about freedom and doing what I want and feel is right for me with my own thoughts and body. Thanks for updating us on this, CJ. There are way more of us than I realized as I get out more and more and really listen to people. I think we keep speaking the truth where we are. It is not one grand movement that is going to save humanity but millions of micro movements woven together. We live in a quantum universe after all.
“The simple fact is, playing by the rules of the system and the ‘reality’ you claim to be opposing a recipe for failure. Or, worse than failure, a diversion, the simulation of success.”
"Mike is just the “facilitator,” who explains the objectives, makes the final decisions, polices people’s speech, and excommunicates suppressive persons whose dissension-sowing threatens to disrupt the atmosphere of mutual respect..."
Some folks are really a fan of Michael Shellenberger they consider him the real deal, however, my Stench-O-Meter smells a bit of bullshit. It could be because I'm not a fan of constructing a bunch of nuclear power plants throughout the US which inevitably will wind up in middle-class neighborhoods resulting in another East Palestine Ohio disaster. That's just the nature of our sucky predatory reality.
Furthermore, I don't believe cozying-up to a "good billionaire" will lead to anything advantageous for the powerless. Especially, one who intends to turn X into WeChat a Chinese-style social platform which when combined with a central bank digital currency and a social credit score will have the power to control who "can" buy and sell, or simply function within civil society. "X" will certainly mark that spot.
Nonetheless, one as intellectual as Shellenberger can't deny Musk's direct connection to the NSA. Even the chimps who were chipped with the Neuralink and died a torturous death knew that. 🦧
I've been biting my tongue on Shellenberger over his advocacy for greater involuntary psych 'treatment' for the homeless. I think such policies are really a form of policing by other means, but even if you disagree, the last few years ought to make us all wary of those who'd erode civil protections in the name of medicine.
1. The rule of simplification - reducing all data to a simple confrontation between 'Good and Bad', 'Friend and Foe'.
2. The rule of disfiguration - discrediting the opposition by crude smears and parodies.
3. The rule of transfusion - manipulating the consensus values of the target audience for one's own ends.
4. The rule of unanimity - presenting one's viewpoint as if it were unanimous opinion of all right-thinking people: draining the doubting individual into agreement by the appeal of star-performers, by social pressure , and by 'psychological contagion'.
5. The rule of orchestration - endlessly repeating the same messages in different variations and combinations.
I recommend reading these two books. The first one is used against 'the masses'. (as in "Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses." and "If one is dealing with a democracy in which the herd and the group follow those whom they recognize as leaders, why should not the young men training for leadership be trained in its technique as well as in its idealism?")
The problem that you have so beautifully articulated which a great many people are not getting is that dissent is a pathology now. I AM Russell Brand, I AM Joe Rogan. There is no other way I will not be perceived in a growing culture of Totalitarianism. Why bother trying to fit in with that shit. Fucking love you man.
Here I offer the lyrics to my latest rap in support...
Winning a war with Meme’s is weird
Mr Serious your looking scared (sceered)
Culture die in don’t talk mode
Vulture try to swoop hawk-low
Now i gotta say what’s socially sanctioned ?
Come here, make me, big money mansion
I’m a say what’s what, guess what? what’s up and I
really, really really don’t give a puck
Hockey-stick hitting’ Rhymes I’m spittin’
Nice off-stage but up here my teeth gritting -
you gotta be shitting?
i love my chickens
but I killed the ducks
Never feels good but so delicious
Murder on my farm I’m a bit Sid vicious
I wish it was diff’rent this prepper- malicious
Gates on a plate I’ll spit you wash the dishes
Chorus
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
paid to rhyme why would I
Stand aside while they lie, no no I
won’t
Verse 2
Censor me like Canadian Truckers
sinsemilla they smoke I bring Ruckus
mess-information don’t toke, don’t suck it
Toxic shit you know you gotta chuck it
No more Netflix - I ‘Stack’ all night
Shoulda let me be I’m a dog in a fight
I fudged the Nudge-unit they better push
Better send those drones down a hole in the bush
And Robots never ever ever ever come back again
I got killer bees ’n’ bats for friends ’n’ while we’re at it
No Bat and Pangolin screwin’
When Money fucks Science you know what they’re doin’
Own it baby don’t deny - the ruling class do nuthin’ but lie
You hit the nail on the head in this piece. In trying to get the " right VIP's" and perhaps due to the world Michael inhabits, he is not fully aware of the fact that he is creating a more establishment adjacent version of the anti censorship movement.-- or one that has some sort of approval from some sector of the establishment. In the final analysis, a large grass roots movement is what is needed. A group large enough that their failure to fall in line, will create fissures large enough to put a dent in the control system. I have greatly appreciated CJ"s tendency to stubbornly follow his own instincts. These are the sorts of people we need most in this world full of trained followers and fragile status seekers.
Oh dear, typical ego-battling over purity tests and the resulting fragmentation of another mainstream-critical movement?
I agree with CJ, "The irony is, when you’re “building a movement,” when you know you are succeeding is when you lose control of it, when the movement doesn’t need you to “lead” it, when it starts moving in directions you never imagined and starts doing things you never intended."
i was going to comment on that exact statement. it's like a startup business, in the beginning a novice ceo feels like every aspect of the business needs oversight, but it's not until you are willing to let go of "the control" you think the company needs, and just let the great intentioned startup take flight on its own. That's when huge growth happens in startups. Movements like companies, especially if they're well intentioned will seak their highest levels if their freedoms allow it.
I keep thinking of a rinky dink dance company I was in (in another life time). It was a vehicle for the choreography of the woman who started it. It was her company.
She didn't notice that the group itself became a living breathing energetic entity that could create something much more beautiful.
Take the Tea Party for instance. It started as a grass roots movement to get a REAL investigation going as to what ACTUALLY happened on Lower Manhattan and in the district of criminals on 9/11/2001. Then that Republican hockey mom from Alaska hijacked it. Now look at it.
No, she didn't; she was just a handy tool. It was hijacked by the Koch brothers and their Kochtopus, who spent a whole lot of money ensuring the group got massive levels of national PR and campaign money. They wanted a way to advance their Libertarian agenda without wasting time with a third party, so they just injected money and Tea Partiers into the GOP.
Thank you for calling Mike out; his control freakishness was evident and also called out publicly on stage by Brand during that London meeting, which was delicious and appeared to phase Mike not at all. More indication of a disorder. What was surprising was no pushback from Taibbi, whom I actually DO consider the 'leader' of the Twitter Files / anti-censorship movement, stung though he may still be by Musk. ~ I'm also a genuine nobody to Mike who didn't deign to respond to when I reached out with an offer to assist his efforts when he put out the call for assistance. I've got a growing list of times I'm relieved I failed.
As one of the millions of “nobodys” out there, I would prefer not to have anyone who was pro-lockdown, pro-mandate, pro-jab “endorse” an anti-censorship declaration. People who say things like “fuck your freedom” are not the kind who truly believe that censorship is a problem. But hey that’s just me. I also don’t think that Elon just “let” the Twitter files out because he’s a swell guy. An “everything app” sure sounds like it has great potential to censor and control its users. But like I said, I’m just one of millions of nobodies. Hope the Germans aren’t getting you too down CJ. Offspring of the diaspora so I can say that 😉
I try not to let anything get me too down. It helps to remember that this is just a short, weird ride, and that my personal problems "don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world," and so on.
You are always a pleasure to read.
THAT certainly is true.
Expect the end of the world. Laugh.
Laughter is immeasurable. Be joyful,
though you have considered all the facts.
-Wendell Berry, Manifesto: The Mad Farmer Liberation Front
There should be three little dots in a row on the bottom right of your post, on the same line as Like, Reply, and Share. Click on the dots, and you'll find that a little menu pops up, and one of the items is Edit...
Thx!
Bogie had the best lines...
Oh yes - that hill of beans I’m always reminded of in this unforgettable scene 😯 https://youtu.be/rEWaqUVac3M?si=dq8S2vRfx0G4sQbQ
I hear Arnold "Screw Your Freedoms" Schwarzenegger will be signing the declaration.
There goes the neighborhood.
lol
The venom with which these things were said was even more chilling that the words themselves.
Get to the choppah!
Screw your declarations (of freedoms)
Legal Alien became Predator
It’s from the movie Predator
There’s also “Alien vs. Predator”
He became what he despised.
The censorship of Twitter is already happening on absurd and dishonest grounds since he employs an WEF mole. See Sasha Latypova
Anyone who uses censorship - which I beleive Sasha did, is suspect. Better to spend no time caring about what they have to say. Let's give our attention (thus our energy, our electricity) to those who have the courage to speak out with courage.
You ‘BELIEVE’ Sasha did use censorship and is suspect. What amazing intellect you have. What you did was read a poorly worded post and jumped on the bandwagon of ‘let’s get the censorship suspect.’ The “suspect” happens to be someone you have never heard of before. She also happens to be one of the bravest, most outspoken and intelligent people on the planet.
Then 8 people who are also idiots, hopped on your doomed bandwagon with likes. Next, Lizzie Cable wants a list of “such people.”
This is a thread on the great CJ Hopkins Substack.
Thank God for such people as Sasha Latypova.
thanks, I hope she now understands what censorship actually is.
If not she might have a good idea if what free speech is now Sasha.😂
Yeah, I was wondering what denise ward was on about with the "which I beleive Sasha did," comment. Maybe there is a Substack controversy to which I am obliviously ignorant.
No there was no evidence for her BELIEF. There is quite a lot of threads related to that. Sasha came on and let her have it.
This is perfect. Someone needs to create a "How to tap out a troll in under 10 seconds w/ Judith Chantler" Instructional video.
You hit every mark.
Just for other's education, I'm going to do a quick tactic analysis in the hopes that that Instructional video gets made.
Tactics used-
1. Non ad hominem attack on the troll. Once a person references their belief, opinion, judgement etc in an argument, they are no longer the messenger. They have now self identified as the expert supporting their position. Question and Refute whatever trait they are relying on to subjectively support that position. Show that they lack the resource they claim.
2. Find their errors, present them, but do not explain their errors to them. (If Denise ever reads this, then I am breaking the no teaching the enemy rule, but it is worth it.)
Denise's error was to read the last 5 words of Wendel's comment and gamble on them referencing a singular entity. "WEF mole. See Sasha Latypova" Sasha is a damn good investigative journalist and pharma expert, not the WEF Mole using censorship. A simple copy and paste search of the name would have prevented this error. This is a failure to do even the lowest effort diligence before entering the fray. Pathetic and Judith gets a clean head shot for it.
"What you did was read a poorly worded post and jumped on the bandwagon of ‘let’s get the censorship suspect.’ The “suspect” happens to be someone you have never heard of before."
Judith was able to extrapolate this take down from that one, unforced error. Most importantly, notice the lack of correction or even bio info presented along with take down. This way, Denise leaves the argument only knowing that Judith somehow knew that she had not done even the most cursory review of the topic prior to commenting. Learns nothing from the self inflicted L, but potentially (Hopefully) gains an anxiety of possible future prescient rebuttals.
3. Embarrass their thoughtless supporters. Those people who liked that comment, now have a solid reason to feel that Denise has utterly failed them. They don't know exactly how, but they do know that they have become somehow lessened in the public opinion. They absolutely are idiots for the knee jerk public support of such a flawed comment, but they will blame the injury on Denise. The quality of character it takes to see when one has only themself to blame for a social injury, precludes those who jump, in total ignorance of the topic at hand, to support a position.
Bonus lesson, can anyone point out the grade school tactic Denise crafted her comment around? It's a logical bait and switch.
Appear to support the thesis, "Anyone who uses censorship... is suspect" (censorship bad), then suggest the antithesis as a solution, " Better to spend no time caring about what they have to say" (self-censor them, censorship good). Juvenile but often effective in shifting the Overton Window.
Very interesting Andi. Thank you.
what censorship did I use?
That's a good question but I read it somewhere and can't place who said it now. I read it by someone that claimed you censored them. I was surprised I must admit however free speech can enable all of us to defend ourselves if someone makes claims that are untrue. That's the beauty of free speech. I don't think I'll be able to trace it back as I read a lot of stuff. But it will help me ask more questions when a claim is made like that. Sorry if it is inaccurate.
ok, so maybe if you don't have evidence then you should not write this stuff about me? I ban trolls from my page, and people who are rude to me or my readers. That's not censorship since I am not government, by the way.
Ok so Sasha dear, that's censoring. You can't ban anyone let alone people you claim are trolls. That's the thing about free speech, you can't be half pregnant about it. No if you allow yourself to do it but not government then that's a double standard. And it goes the same way if you allow government to do things but not your peers, (like stealing for example) This person you call a troll was actually quite genuine. I get that too, people call me a troll but I just want to seek truth and it makes people feel uncomfortable so they think slapping on a name to it is justification. I think this idea of free speech and censorship needs to be ironed out or we're going to get trounced. What is harmful about words written on a screen? It is the one place we can be truly free and you're throwing that away. for us. That endangers my life and everyone's life because if we succumb to censorship for any reason, except maybe someone who is going to report us, or someone who makes threats against us, then it will give consent for government to censor and big tech. There is way too much sensitivity to words on a screen. This is where we must talk openly and freely and not accuse someone and shut them off. I notice that's what always happens - the censor wants their say but denies someone from having their say. Your readers can make up their own minds. Censorship keeps us in the supremacy paradigm and holds us back and that will only fuel the ghouls who want to kill us all. Free speech is all we've got. We have nothing else and they have everything. Why be on the side they're on? Just because someone doesn't say things your way? You can always ignore them too. But to cut off someone's expression should be considered a crime - it's THAT crucial. We are in dangerous waters enough. Why make us sink lower?
"That's a good question but I read it somewhere and can't place who said it now. I read it by someone that claimed you censored them. I was surprised I must admit however free speech can enable all of us to defend ourselves if someone makes claims that are untrue."
In other words an unsubstantiated accusation. These days in particular we should be very careful and avoid that.
Yes! Would you kindly please make a short list of such people for me??
Well we should only give our attention to those who uphold free speech but we should have a list of those who censor. For sure, and highlight those who censor so others won't have to waste their time with them. When I found out Sasha censors, I didn't spend any more time listening to her. What is the point of it being one-sided? That's what we have now so it is remaining the same way will only give us the same results with just different people. It's still tyranny. We all want to be heard. It's important to use the Golden Rule. We cannot progress without free speech. It's of the utmost importance. It slays me how so many just toss it away. What it means is we consent to censorship and thus the overlords will continue to do it to us! But if we revile censorship and practice free speech, it won't be so easy for them to do it to us then.
Notice how CJ has already attracted a whole crowd of malicious freaks around him. Yeah, get that "list." So she can shoot them all....
I get you and you have a point. I think what would be even better would be to have a list of anyone who censors especially those who call themselves truthers. I have a list like that. Sarah Westall is one and there are many others, many of them on substack. I think if we highlighted those who censor then other activists shouldn't bother with them. They just want to have their say but not give the same graciousness to others. We must uphold free speech with all our might as it is of critical importance. It is the vehicle that will enable us to get through all this and start a whole free world. We cannot be free if we cannot speak freely. Anyone can rebutt if something is found to be untrue but to censor must be vigorously disgraced.
Jordan Peterson, Gad Saad, Ezra Levant -- all three censored the participation of Faith Goldy in a seminar about... get this... how society is censoring free speech -- a seminar they had invited her to participate in!!!
Ladies... ladies... is this how you want to reflect your true character, by ignoring the verses that Jesus taught, “to love your neighbor as you love yourself?” “to forgive and forget” as He claims “justice is His!”
How ‘bout “turning the other cheek?”
Both of you appear to be bright, intelligent women who care deeply about the causes for which you give voice to but, in all actuality, you are censoring yourselves when you write this kind of drivel in an uncouth and demeaning way because no one wants to read such horrific spiteful things no matter who it’s coming from.
As women, shouldn’t we support each other instead of tearing each other down???
As the song so beautifully says, please... “Straighten Up and Fly Right!”
https://youtu.be/aSgMDrg_I2Q?si=IhGVo2wkEyI76uyF
I wish I could be candid about what I think about superstition both religion and $ceince. So what actually are you saying - that people cannot disagree? What do you do when you disagree with someone? Sweep it under the carpet? But do tell, because it's interesting that you brought it up, this forced "niceness" where we all have to agree. But agree with who and with what? The status quo? The older person? The more monies person? Who should sweep their opinion under the carpet? Because someone has to if we cannot accept disagreement.
I do NOT believe that Sasha uses censorship!!! If anyone speaks out with courage to speak as you frase it , it is Saha Latypova
I mean that Elon Musk employs a WEF mole now who has censored Sasha Latypova. I wrote “see Sasha Latypova” because she commented on that. I ABSOLUTELY did NOT imply that Sasha practised censorship!! Anybody who reads her work should know how absurd that would be!
What did Sasha Latypova do regarding censorship?
thx! That was my question as well :)
Thanks Sasha. I’m glad you saw this and responded.
I haven’t received a reply but do suspect that person got the wrong name. No link.
Amazing how one mistake could create much harm.
Your work is amazing. Especially love your art.
I believe it was Christine Massey.
I do NOT think that Sasha indulges in censorship!!
Banning trolls and other rude beings is not censorship. It's good house keeping.
Sorry I only now saw this question/ comment! I did not realise that what I wrote could be confusing!!
She WAS censored by Twitter/X !!
See me. Banned again.
What did I do re censorship? Please explain.
I meant that you were censored by Twitter. You are one of my go to writers. My sincere apologies if I gave the impression that you yourself indulged in censoring people!
I see, thanks!
I also replied to the comments that misinterpreted what I wrote.
I do very much hope that you can see my reply!
I think Elon was pissed that he had to get the jab, which made him feel like he was dying. Even as the richest man in the world, he had to stoop as low as the plebs.
I would not believe anything they do in front of the public is true. It's all a stage act. I'd rather err on the side of thinking this than imagine that a man who has billions cannot at least provide wells to Africans with all that money and actually do something that does help humanity.
He got the jab? How do we know that? Because he makes a claim? I certainly don't believe that he took it.
His hairpiece is 100% real.
Had you employed the qualifying word "allegedly" immediately in front of "the richest man in the world", accuracy in presentation would have been amplified. One only need do some research on a particular privately-owned bank in City of London to come to some level of depth understanding. Please, never take "popular" postulations for granite.
The last name of richest man in the world isn't Musk by a long shot. It's Rothschild.
Undoubtedly.
You think he got more than saline?
It’s possible, but all the world’s a stage.
You ARE somebody! Of course you are. You are one of many somebodies. Together we make the whole. But we are all different and that is how nature intended, that is what is good. Whether famous or not, we each are unique and that diversity is what nature figured out that is actually a safeguard. I agree with you on your interpretation that anyone who is pro those factors is that they themselves wish to control.
People come around, don't they? I mean, even those of you reading CJ's substack may have ... oh, I don't know, sanitized your groceries, stood just "far away enough" from someone, or had the thought that if everyone would just stay home, we'd be done with this by now.
"The simple fact is, playing by the rules of the system and the “reality” you claim to be opposing a recipe for failure."
Exactly! The rule to maintain status these days means you MUST go along with the sick and twisted narrative or be bullied, cancelled, accused, jailed, disappeared. Those of us without high status (except for the status we enjoy by being decent people with integrity) aren't subject to this manipulation. The idea of trying to get big names on the list is a strategy that speaks to the cluelessness of Shellenberger's plan. Just have the people sign....the millions of us that make this world go round and get the entire nightmare picture. There is no reaching the compromised at the top of this nightmare (they care too much for their big name reputation), but millions of us 'common man' MIGHT influence the other 50% of the population that we really need to reach.
Amen. Let us ALL sign right? That would make the point. Period.
THIS. Let the people sign!
Couldn’t have said it better. Thank you!
Exactly.
I've noticed the Alt-Sphere has generated a kind of internal hierarchy, where the more well known, more influential and (likely) wealthier up towards the top tend to be more cautious and Mainstream, to the point where they have created a kind of "Mini-Mainstream" reflecting the broader Mainstream throughout the West. Why they do this may have more than one reason, ranging from the innocent personal quirk of simply having the personality that doesn't like conspiracy theory, all the way to the controlled opposition -- and of course a spectrum in between. where would be situated garden-variety corruption/greed. The problem with the Great Unwashed near the low end of the hierarchy (where I dwell) is that many of them seem to be batshit crazy.
The Canadian trucker convoy was a perfect example of a groundswell of support that quickly grew out of the control of any of the organizers. They repeatedly spoke of their amazement that their rather spontaneous and loosely organized plans for driving to Ottawa drew such a massive groundswell of support as people came in droves to cheer them on from the roads and bridges all across Canada. The authoritarians were legitimately threatened.
Yeah, those two little Dick-Taters currently running Canuckistan have granted that new monicker to a land with the words "true north brave and free" in its propounded escutcheon.
"the masses are not your employees. And they aren’t CGI extras in your narcissistic movie. They are actual living, breathing people, people who do not need us to lead them. Basically, the masses don’t give a shit what Richard Dawkins and Slavoj Žižek endorse."
Absolutely.
The dystopia that is planned for us is not going to be resisted by a petition signed by Richard sodding Dawkins. It's going to be resisted by actions like this:
https://dailysceptic.org/2023/09/19/furious-motorists-destroy-more-ulez-cameras-across-london/
Though it would be disgusting for the prole cleanup crew...perhaps even more telling than destroying those looming spy-gadgets...would be for various proles to gather up plenty of fetid feces, human and otherwise...and cast droppings and drippings right at the lenses. Of course, should the individuals be "properly" masked to prevent possible shedding, videos of the fun n' games would be apropos. Viral counterattack, baby.
Power washer will clean it up
Expanding foam, not so much
Gotcha. Point is that the video, particularly if carefully choreographed, is something they could never "clean it up". Too bad that odors, per se, cannot be videoed...however, if those who do the deed put on a good "phew" presentation, the point would be made. Also, it could include masked individuals packaging of doggie-droppings, etc. That would be a form of activist jiu-jitsu, using their own devious imperatives against them. Imaginative actions with no violins involved would not be a turn-off for the general public and even if the Gestapo types get into one of their little acts, results in court would likely resolve in fines...which could be financed by people contributing to the cause. Solidarity, Amigo. When oppressed people get folks laughing rather than crying in their beers, the ballgame is soon over.
While it’s good that both Matt and Mike are waking up, it’s still early for them. It’s like they sometimes forget that it’s not just that things have changed, it’s that they were never what we thought they were. Matt will ask “what happened” and “how did we get here” but he forgets that the past was a lie and he’s asking the wrong questions.
100% with you! https://ghostfromthefuture.substack.com/p/now-that-your-eyes-are-open
People seem to not think too much about the saying that it is the victors who write the history books.
There is no statement being made on the veracity of those history books, except for that the losers' view is likely not in it. The victors history books tell you what the victors want you to 'know'.
And, most importantly, the mere fact that he would disrespect CJ Hopkins, who stands on his own. Blessed be he-long may he pester, as the great gadfly of our generation! Socrates had enemies within his own ranks, too...
It’s almost as though they are controlled opposition. So familiar by now- ho-hum. Yawn.
“Mike means well. He’s got a good heart.” Even CJ is an innocent summer child, to use SageHana’s great noun.
In a chapter in one of his books, Matt Taibbi made malicious fun trashing people that investigate 9/11. Has he ever renounced that act or does he still go along with the discredited story that bin Laden and al-Qaeda did it? What about Mike's view of 9/11? To understand the roots of governance through emergency measures, it is necessary to study the extensive transformations brought about by the 9/11 deceptions. The deal with 9/11 is that you are not allowed to be a Very Important Person if you insist on investigating this crucial episode in twenty-first century geopolitics. And if you avoid the investigative process or just do it privately but keep your mouth closed so MSM continues to call, then your Big Picture analysis is pretty much shit. And you are exposed as a fake to those of us who have made the necessary investigations followed by forthright public conclusions.
Please see
https://anthonyjhall.substack.com/p/if-bin-laden-didnt-do-911-then-who
https://anthonyjhall.substack.com/p/if-bin-laden-didnt-do-911-then-who-a64
Sometimes silence speaks volumes.
Taibbi provides me with many sends. They are most frequently naught but teasers. To get to the meat of his perhaps informative message, one must first pass his pay-wall. I know that jet travel and nice hotels are very pricey these days. However, most of us simply cannot afford that shit...and considering the negative environmental effects of such antics should also be plumbed by those who have been semi-deplatformed by the PTB.
Matt, in case you happen to view this posting, I'm talking to you.
Yeah, he's a self-serving POS in my humble opinion. Would never have spoken up if his own feathers hadn't been a little ruffled.
The worst ones out there do the limited-hangout bit. Your insight into him getting those tail feathers ruffled is more likely the case. Thus my judgement would be that like many another ex media maven, he has only partially awakened. Long-term, sometimes a single step can lead to a thousand mile march. Maybe not gonna happen in this instance, but maybe, just maybe something more along the line will induce him to open BOTH eyes. Point is, he was living a life of acclaim and quasi-luxury and it's hard to adjust to wake-up call reality.
The proof of Michael’s foibles has been staring everyone on Substack in the face for months....
I’m sorry, but if you are genuinely interested in building a movement, that anyone with his obvious intelligence must realise needs to be grassroots as it can be, you do not implement 100% paywall, as he has been for quite some time now. How do I get anyone else interested in it if they can’t engage with the material without forking out first?
At least Taibbi, Aaron Mate, Lee Fang etc, if it is a real humdinger story and of genuine importance to humanity, they unpaywall with a fair amount of consistency. Or, release enough of the story to get a decent feel for it before the paywall kicks in.
Public is like a coin slot peep show - just enough to pique the curiosity before the meat and potatoes are shown, when down slams the latch.
Plus, his opinion of the little people is self evident in his writing on homelessness, which literally makes you feel like he’s talking about a cockroach problem in SF.
Noble intentions, paving and the lake of fire. Mike hasn’t caught on that how you do it is of equal import to the end result, if not more. But then, he’ll have been taught eyes on the prize all his school life.
As always CJ, your honesty is deeply appreciated. Can we have an old school giggle.....?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nIhlfyEyFUQ
Liked for your comments on paywalled information.
I always think that if something is imperative to get out to the masses you wouldn't charge for it. But what do I know, being a nobody? Imagine if the founding fathers kept their movement behind a paywall?
Imagine no longer. Washington has been behind a paywall for ages.
We’re all somebody and nobody. And i get it - he has mouths to feed i expect, employees and all that. But if you are looking to affect change, well, you got to represent the change. At least a little.
I probably shouldn’t out this one, but my suspicion first piqued when MT nearly always called him by his surname on his pod, but everyone else (Lee Fang, Aaron Mate, CJ Hopkins and on and on got the full name treatment)
I hope he succeeds, all that said. The thing is way bigger, but I have my doubts.
Paywalls are a dead giveaway. Any author putting up paywalls is too self-centered to be a leader for freedom. Fake leaders are everywhere. Some are groomed (think Bob, Jr.), others just kind of naturally assume the mantel.
Please do not invoke the "founding fathers". By doing so, you immediately limit your reach to just those that live in a certain part of the world. Plus they made sure to install a 'Democracy', where the 'Electoral College' has the last word and did not include women or slaves.
Personally, I think the Electoral College is genius. It keeps major cities from controlling elections over and over. As to the US "Republic" not including women and slaves upon its founding, can you direct me to any other Republics during that time that did include women and slaves? I admit being ignorant on that fact.
My point was that there was a revolution in thought, and government, and it wasn't only available to those that coughed up some dough.
"Founding Fathers" As a Canadian, when I see that phrase I think of the fact that my country emerged from those who did not go along with the "Founding Fathers" but who rallied around King George and the British Empire. The Declaration of Independence makes a ridiculous cartoon character out of King George III. Until Trudeau became PM, Canada was a pretty decent country that was able to shape our constitutional monarchy into a system that served the citizenry reasonably well. I see the Indian leader Tecumseh, martyred by the US military, as one of Canada's primary founders. For an explanation please see my book
https://www.mqup.ca/american-empire-and-the-fourth-world--the-products-9780773523326.php
"... where the 'Electoral College' has the last word and did not include women or slaves"
In 1787. Could you tell me which people *with power* at that time were not -- by today's standards -- abusing it? Far from being at the bottom of the barrel, collectively, they seem to have been at the top of it.
The paywall sometimes just affects whether you're allowed to comment or not. I can understand the reason for this but it is very much like having a mask suddenly slapped across your face. One's voice is suddenly stifled.
Blocking and the varying degrees of banning are a continuation of this. Although, again, I can understand that at times the necessity for it. But what I'm noticing is 'it' can keep the author from having to be transparent and honest with themselves or others.
It also seems to intensify the need for belonging in the group, the followers. It echoes the group dynamic of 'we need to get jabbed for the common good'. 'I need to belong and must not question' dynamic.
The thought of having to pay for the right to speak seems pretty insidious to me, a bad precedent for things to come.
Yeah this is the piece. People talk about cancel culture and the devastation of mask wearing on so many levels. And yet there is so much judgement and cancelling just deeply ingrained in 'us'.
Yes paying for the right to speak or paying for info about what's happening when so many have had opportunities just yanked from them.
One thing for sure, the price of keeping some remnant of Free Speech is to speak up often and enthusiastically with truth as the target.
Beautiful, absolutely ❤️
That's why I decided to just request donations, although heaven knows I could use a few bucks. 😄 Part of it's just that my other obligations make posting regularly difficult, but the other is that I want people to think about what I'm saying, so I'll leave it up to them whether they think it's worth a tip.
Polite conversation on an open forum isn't easy, but ignoring and/or warning the disruptors is part of maintaining the desired culture. I agree it's a struggle sometimes reminding myself it can't be personal if the person doesn't actually know me. 😉
You can have paid subscribers without putting up a paywall. I think there are many who take paid subscriptions and don't post a lot.
Exactly—that's how I set up Stronghold Too. Everything's there for the world to read, such as it is. If people want to subscribe, I'll be delighted. If they just want to drop a buck or three into the tip-jar, that's lovely, too. Otherwise, I'll settle for polite conversation. 😄
I've been wondering about the idea of polite conversation. If I'm feeling super reactive and defensive I like to pull back and not go there. Possibly I fail at times.
But what is the appropriate etiquette for this 'moment' in time.
I know, I know... don't get reactive and defensive and never ever share feelings (that was maybe more sarcastic). If you're falling down a deep dark well and this is the tenth time today, please just do it with a smile on your face (argh... more sarcasm)
This is an excellent summary. You saved me a lot of time that I don't really have to say the same thing.
By the way, I have been sending notes to people that I do not respect paywall requirements for commenting or for reading "the real meat of the message."
Exactly right. Shellenberger's paywall impasse has been a huge clue to what his real faith in the masses is.
absolutely my take on this guy
I'm pretty sure that falls under the progressive category of "the ends justify the means".
Maybe Shellenberger needs to control the movement in order to control who receives the praise for the movement?
Ding ding ding! Bingo. Narcissistic bullshit. Mike is a schlub with an ego the size of the state of CA. I wouldn't trust him to run a kids effing candy store! Such bloody childish behavior. Good on you, CJ. 100 percent!
I'd give this comment two Likes if I could.
Multiply, pleas.
Well, just your average US citizen here who cares a whole lot about freedom and doing what I want and feel is right for me with my own thoughts and body. Thanks for updating us on this, CJ. There are way more of us than I realized as I get out more and more and really listen to people. I think we keep speaking the truth where we are. It is not one grand movement that is going to save humanity but millions of micro movements woven together. We live in a quantum universe after all.
A lot of uncertainty there =;)
“The simple fact is, playing by the rules of the system and the ‘reality’ you claim to be opposing a recipe for failure. Or, worse than failure, a diversion, the simulation of success.”
Bingo.
"Mike is just the “facilitator,” who explains the objectives, makes the final decisions, polices people’s speech, and excommunicates suppressive persons whose dissension-sowing threatens to disrupt the atmosphere of mutual respect..."
Some folks are really a fan of Michael Shellenberger they consider him the real deal, however, my Stench-O-Meter smells a bit of bullshit. It could be because I'm not a fan of constructing a bunch of nuclear power plants throughout the US which inevitably will wind up in middle-class neighborhoods resulting in another East Palestine Ohio disaster. That's just the nature of our sucky predatory reality.
Furthermore, I don't believe cozying-up to a "good billionaire" will lead to anything advantageous for the powerless. Especially, one who intends to turn X into WeChat a Chinese-style social platform which when combined with a central bank digital currency and a social credit score will have the power to control who "can" buy and sell, or simply function within civil society. "X" will certainly mark that spot.
Nonetheless, one as intellectual as Shellenberger can't deny Musk's direct connection to the NSA. Even the chimps who were chipped with the Neuralink and died a torturous death knew that. 🦧
In my mind, facilitators are not supposed to make final decisions. They are there to ensure a productive exchange of ideas. Oh well.
"They are there to ensure a productive exchange of ideas. Oh well."
It seems to me he is there to censure a productive exchange of ideas. In an anti censorship industrial complex movement.
Inviting people into such a movement that were actively part of the censorship industrial complex is just beyond stupid if you ask me. Just saying.
I've been biting my tongue on Shellenberger over his advocacy for greater involuntary psych 'treatment' for the homeless. I think such policies are really a form of policing by other means, but even if you disagree, the last few years ought to make us all wary of those who'd erode civil protections in the name of medicine.
The Five Rules of Propaganda
1. The rule of simplification - reducing all data to a simple confrontation between 'Good and Bad', 'Friend and Foe'.
2. The rule of disfiguration - discrediting the opposition by crude smears and parodies.
3. The rule of transfusion - manipulating the consensus values of the target audience for one's own ends.
4. The rule of unanimity - presenting one's viewpoint as if it were unanimous opinion of all right-thinking people: draining the doubting individual into agreement by the appeal of star-performers, by social pressure , and by 'psychological contagion'.
5. The rule of orchestration - endlessly repeating the same messages in different variations and combinations.
I recommend reading these two books. The first one is used against 'the masses'. (as in "Ours must be a leadership democracy administered by the intelligent minority who know how to regiment and guide the masses." and "If one is dealing with a democracy in which the herd and the group follow those whom they recognize as leaders, why should not the young men training for leadership be trained in its technique as well as in its idealism?")
https://archive.org/details/bernays-edward-l.-propaganda-1928-1936_202107/mode/2up
The second one is for those that want to understand Propraganda and are part of "the masses"
https://archive.org/details/propagandaformat0000ellu/page/n7/mode/2up
The problem that you have so beautifully articulated which a great many people are not getting is that dissent is a pathology now. I AM Russell Brand, I AM Joe Rogan. There is no other way I will not be perceived in a growing culture of Totalitarianism. Why bother trying to fit in with that shit. Fucking love you man.
Here I offer the lyrics to my latest rap in support...
Winning a war with Meme’s is weird
Mr Serious your looking scared (sceered)
Culture die in don’t talk mode
Vulture try to swoop hawk-low
Now i gotta say what’s socially sanctioned ?
Come here, make me, big money mansion
I’m a say what’s what, guess what? what’s up and I
really, really really don’t give a puck
Hockey-stick hitting’ Rhymes I’m spittin’
Nice off-stage but up here my teeth gritting -
you gotta be shitting?
i love my chickens
but I killed the ducks
Never feels good but so delicious
Murder on my farm I’m a bit Sid vicious
I wish it was diff’rent this prepper- malicious
Gates on a plate I’ll spit you wash the dishes
Chorus
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
paid to rhyme why would I
Stand aside while they lie, no no I
won’t
Verse 2
Censor me like Canadian Truckers
sinsemilla they smoke I bring Ruckus
mess-information don’t toke, don’t suck it
Toxic shit you know you gotta chuck it
No more Netflix - I ‘Stack’ all night
Shoulda let me be I’m a dog in a fight
I fudged the Nudge-unit they better push
Better send those drones down a hole in the bush
And Robots never ever ever ever come back again
I got killer bees ’n’ bats for friends ’n’ while we’re at it
No Bat and Pangolin screwin’
When Money fucks Science you know what they’re doin’
Own it baby don’t deny - the ruling class do nuthin’ but lie
And when they hide to balance the books
They send out the Kraken and all the spooks But…
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
I won’t shut up, I won’t shut up
paid to rhyme why would I
Stand aside while they lie, no no I
won’t shut up
Made to gag yourself in the dark
Here’s da playbook told by a nark
You’re being racist,
Or you hate gays,
The silence- settled - media saays
It’s not the argument - It’s who you are
A deviant taking a thought to far
No Assange you won’t leave your hell cell,
Reporting on facts not going so well
Vee have penetrated zee cabinet
won’t shut up I keep it candid
yeah you just demanded
I zip my lips keep my assets stranded
I’m not a Turkey voting for Christmas
But look around everyone did this
Killing’s caring, should be shared
I never understood how much we all cared
I won’t shut up (sung) oooh the room getting HOT
Class war’s on but people think it’s not - What?!
Is everyone getting’ private jets and yachts?
Read the tea leaves - don’t trust these fools
People I love you but I got popcorn too
You wanna hurt yourselves then you do you
I stand up Talk loud, proud of it wooooooo
Bravo CJ! Keep up the 🔥‼️
You hit the nail on the head in this piece. In trying to get the " right VIP's" and perhaps due to the world Michael inhabits, he is not fully aware of the fact that he is creating a more establishment adjacent version of the anti censorship movement.-- or one that has some sort of approval from some sector of the establishment. In the final analysis, a large grass roots movement is what is needed. A group large enough that their failure to fall in line, will create fissures large enough to put a dent in the control system. I have greatly appreciated CJ"s tendency to stubbornly follow his own instincts. These are the sorts of people we need most in this world full of trained followers and fragile status seekers.
Oh dear, typical ego-battling over purity tests and the resulting fragmentation of another mainstream-critical movement?
I agree with CJ, "The irony is, when you’re “building a movement,” when you know you are succeeding is when you lose control of it, when the movement doesn’t need you to “lead” it, when it starts moving in directions you never imagined and starts doing things you never intended."
i was going to comment on that exact statement. it's like a startup business, in the beginning a novice ceo feels like every aspect of the business needs oversight, but it's not until you are willing to let go of "the control" you think the company needs, and just let the great intentioned startup take flight on its own. That's when huge growth happens in startups. Movements like companies, especially if they're well intentioned will seak their highest levels if their freedoms allow it.
I keep thinking of a rinky dink dance company I was in (in another life time). It was a vehicle for the choreography of the woman who started it. It was her company.
She didn't notice that the group itself became a living breathing energetic entity that could create something much more beautiful.
It wasn't seen or allowed to move forward.
Take the Tea Party for instance. It started as a grass roots movement to get a REAL investigation going as to what ACTUALLY happened on Lower Manhattan and in the district of criminals on 9/11/2001. Then that Republican hockey mom from Alaska hijacked it. Now look at it.
No, she didn't; she was just a handy tool. It was hijacked by the Koch brothers and their Kochtopus, who spent a whole lot of money ensuring the group got massive levels of national PR and campaign money. They wanted a way to advance their Libertarian agenda without wasting time with a third party, so they just injected money and Tea Partiers into the GOP.
Thank you for calling Mike out; his control freakishness was evident and also called out publicly on stage by Brand during that London meeting, which was delicious and appeared to phase Mike not at all. More indication of a disorder. What was surprising was no pushback from Taibbi, whom I actually DO consider the 'leader' of the Twitter Files / anti-censorship movement, stung though he may still be by Musk. ~ I'm also a genuine nobody to Mike who didn't deign to respond to when I reached out with an offer to assist his efforts when he put out the call for assistance. I've got a growing list of times I'm relieved I failed.
In order not to repeat myself I will just ask you to read my comment on Taibbi and the Twitter Files somewhere under this post.