From Styxhexenhammer666 Alexandria Ocasio Cortez Celebrates Corporate Censorship In Newspeaky Tweet, posted on youtube 06/04/2019
Tarl Warwick the author, editor and youtuber who posts under the handle Styxhexenhammer666 is a good content creator whom I watch regularly and have even purchased some of his books. Styx presents common sense analysis in a straightforward manner that talks directly to his audience, not down to them and as such has amassed a sizable following. He's a bright guy who is fluent in normie and I can easily find myself agreeing with him up to 90% of the time. I have just a couple of points of disagreement too long to post in a comment.
As to the title and main idea of this post, Styx describes himself as a libertarian and this is why he does not grasp the fundamental concept that economics is downstream of politics as politics is downstream of culture. He therefore overlooks the cognitive dissonance created by claiming big tech businesses deplatform or censor content creators with whom the tech businesses make money and then acknowledges that the so-called "woke" capital always loses money. But why? Because they're either threatened by these youtube content creators because...reasons or some other big media business with tens of millions of viewers per program fears competition from youtubers with several thousand to hundreds of thousands or around a million viewers per upload. He likewise acknowledges that it is mostly perceived "right wingers" that are subjected to censorship and de-platforming on social media but then to deny the obvious political motivation and bolster that characteristic libertarian "man as a rational economic actor" nostrum he talks on about the few outlier leftists who are given the same treatment.
No businessman or CEO in his right mind or absent compulsion by forces greater than himself would willingly deplatform successful content creators as to in effect kick money out of bed. Not to mention that in doing so, big tech alienates the fans of said content creator, customers and with draconian censorship discourages new customers and content creators with whom they make more money. To claim big media somehow would be willing to spend more money, without any reasonable way to profit from it to "bribe" social media tech firms to do the dirty work of deplatforming much smaller potential competitors is ludicrous. Big mainstream media makes its money selling advertising spots, not by posting content on youtube or other social media. Television and cable news were always operated at a loss for the corporate owners which was offset by their other, more popular and profitable offerings. It's not about the number of views on youtube but the Nielsen ratings that the TV people care about. To have these industries act in such close concert and often within 24 hours of each other in a way that harms their economic interests clearly demonstrates a higher coordinating power with a clear agenda at work than the libertarian's usual "muh money" thinking. Also consider how in the recent congressional hearings on the rise of white nationalism/white supremacy the big Silicon Valley CEOs were hauled in and berated for not censoring badthinkers on their platforms enough. If that was all some kind of act, it sure looked very convincing.
So it IS a political and social agenda at work here, Styx, your money is the root of all evil thesis not withstanding.
Sometimes the rational economic actor motive can be true but when all you have is the economic materialist man hammer then everything looks like a rich man bad/muh money nail. Any analysis that cannot fully explain all observed facts and yields a contradictory result must be assumed to be incorrect and re-examined.
Styx should really add a few more tools besides that one hammer to his kit.
So here is the crux of the problem. Styx, like any libertarian, does not understand the left (or real human nature for that matter) at all.
Whereas human beings have moral agency and will act in their own best self interest even if it is in an irrational and/or immoral manner, libertarians are stuck on the flawed premise that all human interactions are rational and economic. The libertarian is too much a pure materialist with a minimalist philosophy to comprehend the irrational, emotionally based thinking of fanatical leftists (explained further in my previous posts here, here and here). To a person with a rigid adherence to the few strictly materialistic philosophic principles libertarianism has, the concept of an immoral and irrational leftist who cares only about winning, carrying out their agenda, at any and all cost, even if it causes the bankruptcy of a business is, to the libertarian, inconceivable. That the left will ruthlessly pursue anyone who either disagrees with them, the heretics and unbelievers, or those whom they view as a devil for no other reason than blind hatred completely flummoxes the libertarian. They struggle to explain this phenomena through the gnosticism of the non-aggression principle and secular materialism with no success. That the left has no limiting principles in pursuing their agenda and in persecuting their enemies is such a violation of the non-aggression principle and rational man that they are left speechless. In this situation and left with no other means of explaining it, Styx inevitably falls back on a simplistic "it's big corporations picking on us" explanation no matter how contradictory it is.
Further, libertarians are unable to grasp the difference between the concepts of influence and of power erroneously conflating simple possession of wealth with power. Wealth without real power can only buy influence and privileges (a previous post on the difference between power and influence here). It must be noted that there are limits placed on the actions, public positions and policies of all private businesses by both government laws and regulations and public opinion which influences sales and stock prices. Big corporations and billionaires may buy influence but absent possession of a large standing army, do not have any real power. Rich people may have privileges the rest of us do not have, but the rich pay those in government with real power for those privileges. It's a feudal system where the tithe paying vassal is permitted a certain amount of latitude within his fiefdom but within limits set by his liege lord.
Finally, libertarians like Styx do not even recognize that they themselves are actually part of the right but erroneously think themselves as somehow above the whole left-right thing because they sometimes find themselves on the same side of an issue as the left. (my earlier post on left and right is here) Again the libertarian does not understand the left at all. Whereas a libertarian like Styx might support such issues as homosexual marriage and legalizing some drugs consistent with their individualistic philosophy, the leftist weaponizes these issues to attack and destroy society. It's OK to be on the right, Styx.
In conclusion, I have posted very two abbreviated versions of this post in the comments section of Styx's videos. It's not surprising he did not engage me because he uploads four videos a day and receives hundreds of comments per upload. I don't expect he reads every single comment as that would be impossible. Styx certainly has other necessary things to do during the day than to personally respond to each and every comment or engage in lengthy debates. I don't think he's scared and hiding from me as another notable local blogger who shall remain nameless does so no offense is taken or offense meant with this post. If Tarl Warwick were to run for an elected office in which I could vote, he would have my vote, minor differences aside.
Indeed, one would be hard pressed to find a YouTube content creator more eloquent and verbose the Brandon F . His channel usually features m...
Pictured above is the inestimable Mitch Waxman, the learned Humble Narrator of the Newtown Pentacle blog at Nier's Tavern . It is i...
To open, a brief summary of the following post would be this: Most people are inclined to be followers, live within the collective rules of ...
Ever have a debate with a liberal progressive and notice that whatever argument you present, no matter how well reasoned or proofs provided,...