I posted a year ago about this one rather big-name anti-SJW YouTube critic who is being a huge hypocrite. He is extremely prolific, uploading 3 to 4 videos every day on average. He is heavily critical of the regressive left, their ideology, their policies and their tactics. Every time a conservative, or someone who is critical of the left, gets banned from a social media platform, YouTube, Patreon, or somewhere else, he almost always makes one or more videos about it, commenting on and criticizing that company's leftist policies and imposing restrictions on people's free speech.
He himself got banned for life from Magic the Gathering tournaments because SJW Wizards of the Coast didn't like his politically incorrect memes and criticism of a female cosplayer. He dedicated like a year on that subject alone, exposing the hypocrisy of Wizards of the Coast for banning people for their expression of opinions, but just giving minor infractions to cheaters and not doing anything about convicted pedophiles among their ranks.
Yet, it only takes the right (well, wrong) kind of person, and suddenly all that free speech advocacy, and all that constitutional rights advocacy, goes to the trashcan, and he himself loudly promotes banning a person from YouTube because of his past crimes, because that person uploaded a new video.
Mind you, there's nothing criminal or even abhorrent about that latest video. It's just him talking about how he has been prosecuted by the authorities of his country for his crimes. There is no criminal activity of any sort happening in the video, or even him advocating for any sort of criminal activity. Yet this guy still wants him banned from YouTube entirely, and all of his videos removed, because of his past crimes.
I can't stand hypocrites like this. They are all about free speech this, and free speech that, and they oppose corporations banning people because of their opinions that the regressive left doesn't like... but then it only takes the right kind of person and all those principles go out the window and he starts himself loudly promoting the deplatforming of someone and banning him from YouTube. And not based on current behavior, but based on past behavior.
Rather obviously I heavily object to that person's past criminal activity (cruel animal torture). However, I'm a strong believer in people's fundamental inalienable constitutional rights, such as right to free speech. These rights are irrevocable, and do not depend on past behavior or past crimes. That person retains the exact same rights to express his opinions as anybody else, regardless of what he may have done in the past. If he uploads a video that contains no criminal activity and no bannable offense, then that video has the exact same right to stay as any other video by anybody else.
(And by "constitutional rights" I'm not talking about one particular written document of one particular country, but about a more universal principle: All people should have the same fundamental rights regardless of which country they happen to live in. It shouldn't be tied to one particular country, or being the citizen of that particular country. It would be highly hypocritical to say "I support people's constitutional rights... but only if they live in this one particular country.")
And what do you know, the comment section of this video that advocates the banning of that person from YouTube reads exactly like the comment section of a regressive leftist SJW video, as I have described in other blog posts (such as here and here). Not only is the author of the video a hypocrite who suddenly has forgotten all of his principles about opposing deplatforming and supporting people's right to free speech, but every single person in the comment section is riled up and fully behind him. There's like literally no difference between the comment section of this video and the worst social justice advocacy videos and social media posts out there. It's all the same.
I replied to many of these comments by reminding them about people's constitutional rights, and how they are not dependent on people's past crimes, and how hypocritical it is to claim to oppose SJW tactics and deplatforming, only to turn around and use those exact same tactics when the wrong kind of person appears.
The most hilarious responses to my responses are the ones that accuse me of being... a leftist. And one person even accused me of being a member of "antifa".
For defending someone's constitutional rights to free speech.
The huge irony in all this is that I have been accused in the past, in similar comment sections, of being a "right-wing extremist" by leftists for defending people's right to free speech. Now I'm being accused of being a left-wing extremist by rightists... for the exact same thing. For defending people's right to free speech.
It's not easy being a centrist and a constitutionalist.
By the way, one of the responses (to my response) that I liked the most was one that said, among other things, "this is the wrong hill to die on" (referring to me defending the rights of this particular person). This allowed me to write one of the most inspirational things I have written in a long while. Paraphrasing:
"I completely disagree. This is exactly the right hill to die on. It's easy to support the rights of people you like and agree with. Where your principles are truly tested is when you need to support the rights of people you detest. This is the true test of character and principles. Are you willing to defend people's rights, even those you abhor? Or are you just going to throw your principles and nice speeches away the second that a despicable person appears? As a very wise person once said, I disapprove of what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Your principles are not tested when you need to defend a person you support. Your principles are truly tested only when you need to defend a person you hate.
He himself got banned for life from Magic the Gathering tournaments because SJW Wizards of the Coast didn't like his politically incorrect memes and criticism of a female cosplayer. He dedicated like a year on that subject alone, exposing the hypocrisy of Wizards of the Coast for banning people for their expression of opinions, but just giving minor infractions to cheaters and not doing anything about convicted pedophiles among their ranks.
Yet, it only takes the right (well, wrong) kind of person, and suddenly all that free speech advocacy, and all that constitutional rights advocacy, goes to the trashcan, and he himself loudly promotes banning a person from YouTube because of his past crimes, because that person uploaded a new video.
Mind you, there's nothing criminal or even abhorrent about that latest video. It's just him talking about how he has been prosecuted by the authorities of his country for his crimes. There is no criminal activity of any sort happening in the video, or even him advocating for any sort of criminal activity. Yet this guy still wants him banned from YouTube entirely, and all of his videos removed, because of his past crimes.
I can't stand hypocrites like this. They are all about free speech this, and free speech that, and they oppose corporations banning people because of their opinions that the regressive left doesn't like... but then it only takes the right kind of person and all those principles go out the window and he starts himself loudly promoting the deplatforming of someone and banning him from YouTube. And not based on current behavior, but based on past behavior.
Rather obviously I heavily object to that person's past criminal activity (cruel animal torture). However, I'm a strong believer in people's fundamental inalienable constitutional rights, such as right to free speech. These rights are irrevocable, and do not depend on past behavior or past crimes. That person retains the exact same rights to express his opinions as anybody else, regardless of what he may have done in the past. If he uploads a video that contains no criminal activity and no bannable offense, then that video has the exact same right to stay as any other video by anybody else.
(And by "constitutional rights" I'm not talking about one particular written document of one particular country, but about a more universal principle: All people should have the same fundamental rights regardless of which country they happen to live in. It shouldn't be tied to one particular country, or being the citizen of that particular country. It would be highly hypocritical to say "I support people's constitutional rights... but only if they live in this one particular country.")
And what do you know, the comment section of this video that advocates the banning of that person from YouTube reads exactly like the comment section of a regressive leftist SJW video, as I have described in other blog posts (such as here and here). Not only is the author of the video a hypocrite who suddenly has forgotten all of his principles about opposing deplatforming and supporting people's right to free speech, but every single person in the comment section is riled up and fully behind him. There's like literally no difference between the comment section of this video and the worst social justice advocacy videos and social media posts out there. It's all the same.
I replied to many of these comments by reminding them about people's constitutional rights, and how they are not dependent on people's past crimes, and how hypocritical it is to claim to oppose SJW tactics and deplatforming, only to turn around and use those exact same tactics when the wrong kind of person appears.
The most hilarious responses to my responses are the ones that accuse me of being... a leftist. And one person even accused me of being a member of "antifa".
For defending someone's constitutional rights to free speech.
The huge irony in all this is that I have been accused in the past, in similar comment sections, of being a "right-wing extremist" by leftists for defending people's right to free speech. Now I'm being accused of being a left-wing extremist by rightists... for the exact same thing. For defending people's right to free speech.
It's not easy being a centrist and a constitutionalist.
By the way, one of the responses (to my response) that I liked the most was one that said, among other things, "this is the wrong hill to die on" (referring to me defending the rights of this particular person). This allowed me to write one of the most inspirational things I have written in a long while. Paraphrasing:
"I completely disagree. This is exactly the right hill to die on. It's easy to support the rights of people you like and agree with. Where your principles are truly tested is when you need to support the rights of people you detest. This is the true test of character and principles. Are you willing to defend people's rights, even those you abhor? Or are you just going to throw your principles and nice speeches away the second that a despicable person appears? As a very wise person once said, I disapprove of what you are saying, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."
Your principles are not tested when you need to defend a person you support. Your principles are truly tested only when you need to defend a person you hate.
Comments
Post a Comment