I was just banned from Google Youtube 4 watching the 2nd Amendement March

a reply to: Xcalibur254

YouTube PROTECTS my Copyright infringement requests for removable original content.

Private company, private rules...Like ATS

a reply to: Violater1

I watched it and never got banned.

I guess the harsh reality and with the spirit of capitalism Google is a private company and can offer what ever content they want on their Youtube platform. If one doesn't like it they can always start their own video sharing website and not censor content that they don't find objectionable.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises. They are both corporate owned. This is an end product of capitalism, huge social and cultural entities being controlled by profit driven goals that at it's core have little to do with human or American rights.

Logging into them and typing

'' I type in USA, USA, MAGA, KAG, KAG, KAG!
I did the several time, along several hundred others.''

is just like walking into a 7/11 barefoot and not wearing a shirt after they had posted their policy of not allowing bare feet and shirtless torsos.

Neither has anything to do with ''human'' or ''American'' rights, only corporate rights. If we laud the system of capitalism over socialism,or for that matter any other economic system, then we must accept that corporate right to do what ever the hell they want.

The ultimate goal of socialism is govt control of the means of production. Fascism is when the totalitarian govt leaves some private enterprise in place but still used the corporate means of control over the population. Both systems are leftist.

originally posted by: Violater1
Spammed a live stream channel repeatedly with nonsense comments.....got banned


Hurrrdurrr censorship

Maybe act like less of a fool on a platform with low tolerance for bull#?

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus
I think I almost see your point here. However, from my understanding your definitions are a bit off.
What you describe as the ultimate goal of socialism is really the transitory period of communism needed to battle the capitalist state while socialism is allowed to grow from the bottom up. Here socialism is not government controlled production as in a communist state but rather the ultimate goal of the workers themselves who own and direct their own production and sales, marketing and distribution etc.

It's the problem here that in modern times we have never seen a truly socialist economy. That abortion we witnessed in Russia and it's step child in China never made it past that Communist step. Both failed miserably and only allowed authoritarians who had risen to power to take it all over and run it as their own corporation. Russia was a corporation run by a few as well as China today.

I understand true socialism as I described above as being a conservative dream, that is authority beyond individuals being in charge of their own lives and labor is unacceptable.

originally posted by: Violater1

originally posted by: StallionDuck
a reply to: Violater1

oooooh! The channel got banned. I thought you did. Wait.. You said you were.

I'm confused. Why someone spamming the channel? I can think of 2 reasons the channel was banned and then so were you. If you were spamming the channel for views then yeah, that could happen on both of you and the channel.

Either I'm missing something or you're not explaining things well.

Everyone else understood it.
Perhaps if you re-read it again, you might understand it and answer your own question.

No, he's right. It's nearly indecipherable, since you apparently have no grasp of the english language whatsoever and have no clue how to express yourself clearly.

originally posted by: [apost=24885893]TerryMcGuire[/post]a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus
I think I almost see your point here. However, from my understanding your definitions are a bit off.
What you describe as the ultimate goal of socialism is really the transitory period of communism needed to battle the capitalist state while socialism is allowed to grow from the bottom up. Here socialism is not government controlled production as in a communist state but rather the ultimate goal of the workers themselves who own and direct their own production and sales, marketing and distribution etc.

It's the problem here that in modern times we have never seen a truly socialist economy. That abortion we witnessed in Russia and it's step child in China never made it past that Communist step. Both failed miserably and only allowed authoritarians who had risen to power to take it all over and run it as their own corporation. Russia was a corporation run by a few as well as China today.

I understand true socialism as I described above as being a conservative dream, that is authority beyond individuals being in charge of their own lives and labor is unacceptable.

My definitions ? You seem to be one of those people who believe that socialism will work if we only would just have the right people running things.
“True socialism” is not and never has been a conservative dream. That is your dream. If only the dratted capitalists would just get out of the way... right? It is your perspective that capitalism is bad( even though socialists depend on capital to fund their agendas). I am familiar with the concept that socialism is considered an intermediary between communism and capitalism, in fact I’ve said it a number of times on these boards.
What I find unacceptable and frankly completely outrageous is your supposition that somehow socialism gives people the liberty to control their own lives. The opposite is true in fact, that socialism requires that people sacrifice personal liberty for the Supreme State. I can tell you beyond the shadow of a doubt that I am correct about this. Socialism is about the forceful enforcement of the goals of the State. Socialism is communism lite but nevertheless just as ruthless as any communist regime. It will never bring prosperity and frankly it is not even fair.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

''Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity''

This from wiki is in line with my understanding

Is not self management at the core of conservatism? I was in a thread with a self proclaimed conservative recently where he or she proudly claimed that it is. Is not citizen ownership of equity also a core principle of conservative values? I always thought it was.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises. They are both corporate owned. This is an end product of capitalism, huge social and cultural entities being controlled by profit driven goals that at it's core have little to do with human or American rights.

Logging into them and typing

'' I type in USA, USA, MAGA, KAG, KAG, KAG!
I did the several time, along several hundred others.''

is just like walking into a 7/11 barefoot and not wearing a shirt after they had posted their policy of not allowing bare feet and shirtless torsos.

Neither has anything to do with ''human'' or ''American'' rights, only corporate rights. If we laud the system of capitalism over socialism,or for that matter any other economic system, then we must accept that corporate right to do what ever the hell they want.

I don't understand how government funding and contracts makes this the fault of capitalism...sounds more like crony big government creating monopolies.

originally posted by: AnonymousMoose

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises. They are both corporate owned. This is an end product of capitalism, huge social and cultural entities being controlled by profit driven goals that at it's core have little to do with human or American rights.

Logging into them and typing

'' I type in USA, USA, MAGA, KAG, KAG, KAG!
I did the several time, along several hundred others.''

is just like walking into a 7/11 barefoot and not wearing a shirt after they had posted their policy of not allowing bare feet and shirtless torsos.

Neither has anything to do with ''human'' or ''American'' rights, only corporate rights. If we laud the system of capitalism over socialism,or for that matter any other economic system, then we must accept that corporate right to do what ever the hell they want.

I don't understand how government funding and contracts makes this the fault of capitalism...sounds more like crony big government creating monopolies.

Those monopolies literally strangle the free market which is very much a problem and part of the reason we are seeing wealth concentrated in fewer hands.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

''Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership of the means of production and workers' self-management as well as the political theories and movements associated with them. Social ownership can be public, collective or cooperative ownership, or citizen ownership of equity''

This from wiki is in line with my understanding

Is not self management at the core of conservatism? I was in a thread with a self proclaimed conservative recently where he or she proudly claimed that it is. Is not citizen ownership of equity also a core principle of conservative values? I always thought it was.

You make the mistake of believing the lie that socialism is citizen ownership ... it is State ownership... it is the collective not individual liberty. I remember when Obama was talking about “collective” salvation. This is just more socialist propaganda. He thought he could co-opt all the religious people with it. Please stop conflating Progressive ideals with conservative values.

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: AnonymousMoose

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises. They are both corporate owned. This is an end product of capitalism, huge social and cultural entities being controlled by profit driven goals that at it's core have little to do with human or American rights.

Logging into them and typing

'' I type in USA, USA, MAGA, KAG, KAG, KAG!
I did the several time, along several hundred others.''

is just like walking into a 7/11 barefoot and not wearing a shirt after they had posted their policy of not allowing bare feet and shirtless torsos.

Neither has anything to do with ''human'' or ''American'' rights, only corporate rights. If we laud the system of capitalism over socialism,or for that matter any other economic system, then we must accept that corporate right to do what ever the hell they want.

I don't understand how government funding and contracts makes this the fault of capitalism...sounds more like crony big government creating monopolies.

Those monopolies literally strangle the free market which is very much a problem and part of the reason we are seeing wealth concentrated in fewer hands.

Yet socialists keep telling us that socialism is the way out.

Natural News is under severe cyber warfare attack. New posts delayed... recent posts being recovered... site functionality severely compromised... coordinated censorship striking NaturalNews, Judicial Watch, Right Side and other indy media... check back for updates. Pray for us all. - Mike

Natural News

There is an information war going on. You tube is banning live streams of the impeachment trial due to community standards guidelines, go figure.

The live stream video by Pete Santilli1 linked to on page 4 got removed because it showed someone carrying a gun. He did manage to get the video reinstated for a little while, but now he is getting censored harder with all of his uploads over the past couple of weeks gone.

Is it a real surprise things are going this way as big tech is working to centralized and consolidate all of its power?

originally posted by: ThirdEyeofHorus

originally posted by: hopenotfeariswhatweneed

originally posted by: AnonymousMoose

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises. They are both corporate owned. This is an end product of capitalism, huge social and cultural entities being controlled by profit driven goals that at it's core have little to do with human or American rights.

Logging into them and typing

'' I type in USA, USA, MAGA, KAG, KAG, KAG!
I did the several time, along several hundred others.''

is just like walking into a 7/11 barefoot and not wearing a shirt after they had posted their policy of not allowing bare feet and shirtless torsos.

Neither has anything to do with ''human'' or ''American'' rights, only corporate rights. If we laud the system of capitalism over socialism,or for that matter any other economic system, then we must accept that corporate right to do what ever the hell they want.

I don't understand how government funding and contracts makes this the fault of capitalism...sounds more like crony big government creating monopolies.

Those monopolies literally strangle the free market which is very much a problem and part of the reason we are seeing wealth concentrated in fewer hands.

Yet socialists keep telling us that socialism is the way out.

a reply to: AnonymousMoose

Good point Anon, if that is the way one wants to see it. To me it's a question of what is the tail and what is the dog. It's really tough to tell. Crony big government or crony capitalism. Ideally a capitalist enterprise could and should be able to thrive on it's merits alone. By theory. Yet for the most, they seek that funding and those subsidies and those government contracts and to many survive only because of them.

You suggest that it is big government that creates monopolies where I see that it is government that ''allows'' monopolies.
There used to be government regulations that held the formation of large corporations to a much tougher standard. Many of these regulations were swept away during the Reagan and Clinton years sparking the current corporate consolidation we see today.

So yeah, which wags the tail and which wags the dog.

a reply to: ThirdEyeofHorus

You make the mistake of believing the lie that socialism is citizen ownership ... it is State ownership... it is the collective not individual liberty.

I have already stated that socialism as I understand it is an ideal, one that we have not seen in our modern world, and one we are not likely to. I have stated that communism is what we have seen. Those have failed in their purpose and become nothing more than totalitarian dictatorships. Neither you or I want this.

So just what is the lie that is believed here. Is it the lie you think I believe in citizen ownership, or could it be the lie that what we have seen from communism is the same as socialism.

And just what is the State. Is it a foreign entity dictating to us what to do and what to think? Or as in the founding of our own nation the ideal notion of we the people governing ourselves. Just as I hold that it is the latter, that we the people should be our own government , real socialism holds that we the people should own our own means of production. And this to me sounds like something that conservative values would champion.

At the core of capiatlism's success is this little thought about conundrum. Socialism depends upon individuals working for themselves and not a boss. Working with others determining their own product, their own marketing their own distribution. Their own time for their own profit.

Capitalism depends upon people who work for a boss where it is the boss that gets the lion's share of the profit. So from this perspective, while the boss has that ''individual liberty'' the workers have given it up. In a way this system promotes lazy workers who do not believe that they can govern and execute their own labor and hence end up sweating themselves to death for the benefit of the bosses

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: Violater1

Of course they are censoring it. It doesn't surprise me, and yet people will still argue that an agenda against the 2nd Amendment doesn't exist.

The Constitution allows us to regulate any business enterprises in pretty much any way we see fit.

That means we can regulate YouTube or FB or any business by prohibiting them from censoring various political views.

If they break the rules we can revoke their charter or even nationalize them. The sky's the limit and it's all Constitutional.

originally posted by: TerryMcGuire
Neither Google or you-tube are public enterprises.

Then this should stop immediately... www.mic.com...

Besides Intel, Google is the top tech company that receives government subsidies, picking up more than $630 million from states like Oregon, North Carolina and a few others. What does a multi-billion dollar company that controls the majority of the world’s Internet need with more than $630 million in government subsidies, you ask? Well, you know, for things like property taxes and training reimbursements. What, do you all think that money just grows on trees?! Also, don’t even think about googling "Google government subsidies" because THEY WILL KNOW ABOUT IT.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

The government call it subsidies, Google don't need the money, but like any business if the price is right certain tools may become available.