| 73Q Music Videos | Vote On Clips | Submit | Login   |

Reddit Digg Stumble Facebook
Desc:'They're Maoists. They have the Little Red Book in their hand. You're not gonna get them back.'
Category:News & Politics, Religious
Tags:billy corgan, alex jones, political correctness, Social Justice Warriors, Cultural Marxism
Submitted:Pillager
Date:04/22/16
Views:1010
Rating:
View Ratings
Register to vote for this video

People Who Liked This Video Also Liked:
Comet ELENIN?? appears over St Paul, MN on 6/12/2011 EXCLUSIVE VIDEO FOOTAGE AMAZING!! READ
The Rumble in the Air Conditioned Auditorium
Mitchell and Webb - The Gift Shop Sketch
Mad Max 2: The Road Warrior (1981) - Making Of Documentary
Frank Black - Hang on to Your Ego
Ryan Larkin- Syrinx
A casualty of the (South Carolina) voter ID law
Avengers Assemble - Trailer (2012)
Typical Pulmex Land
Compilation of Cars Taking Illegal Lefts In Front Of Light Rail Trains
Comment count is 34
Old_Zircon
Stars for the Anthroplex ad, holy shit.
John Holmes Motherfucker
When righties talk about THE WAR ON FREEDOM OF SPEECH, get ready for that Orwellian disconnect, cause it's coming soon. Righties want to suppress speech they don't like, while pretending to be champions of free speech. Remember when Gamergaters lobbied the government to put Anita Sarkeesiian in prison foir speaking to the United Nations? It was in defense of Freedom of speech.

Remember the Gamergater's manifesto "WE ARE GAMERS, WE ARE ALIVE"?

It begins like this:4741111111111111111111111111111111111111117

We believe that games are an art form that should be allowed to flourish and evolve naturally and freely
and should thus be protected from the dogmatic rhetoric of a clique of totalitarian ideologues

And the, a couple of lines down:

and condemn all attempts to use disinformation, censorship and bullying to disrupt free discussion.

You see, you may think that since they detmand protection from ideological rhetoric, that means that they favor censorship, since that's what cewnsorship means, but NOOOOOOOO!

That's because War is Peace, Freedom is slavery, and SPEECH IS CENSORSHIP. Got it? That's why attempting to suppress Anita Sarkeesian's videos is actually a blow agains censorship.
Two Jar Slave
Frankly doesn't seem like a bidg deal.

EvilHomer
A few things, John:

1. is Mr Corgan *wrong*? In the three-to-six paragraphs you posted, you don't seem to have addressed the actual content of this video. I would think the video in question would be the most important thing to rant about, so - forget Gamergate or your favorite young women, what about Mr Corgan's comments about corporate control over public discourse? What are your thoughts on *that* issue?

2. this isn't really a "rightie" or "lefty" thing (whatever those words might mean). I think that if you're going to be honest, you'll agree with me that people on both sides of the artificially constructed culture divide are guilty of undermining free speech, and there are people on both sides committed to standing up for free speech. It's a tribe-neutral principle, don't you agree?

3. haven't you often and repeatedly come out *in favor* of censorship...? I thought cracking down on speech you found to be objectionable was one of your "things". Have you finally decided to come and join us Good Guys over here on the Light Side, or are you just feigning concern about Orwellianism because, urggg urrg video game players?

EvilHomer
Also, what do you think about Evalion, aka the new Boxxy? She's becoming embroiled in a storm of internet scandal and online harassment, and frankly I think someone needs to stand up for her before it's too late.

Perhaps it could be you?

Cena_mark
Corgan is wrong. He invested in TNA wrestling. He's an idiot. One of those dorks who sees political correctness as tyranny even though it's not enforced by the government. It's manners and norms.

EvilHomer
So if admitted political censorship is not enforced by the state, but is instead enforced by unaccountable billionaires who run massive for-profit NSA data-mining corporations, you're saying that's OK, Cena?

Again, re: my previous arguments about the insanity of American tribalism. We've now come to the point where apparently it's "leftist" to endorse censorship AND Reaganaut corporate-dictatorships.

... at least until we catch up to Europe's level of thought-control sophistication, and Twitter's "hashtag censorship" starts being used to take down liberal critiques of Islam and misogyny.

EvilHomer
In your defense, Cena, I will agree that given the choice between hard censorship via the coercive power of the state, verses soft censorship via private hegemony over a technically voluntary sector of the market, the soft censorship (i.e. the libertarian-paternalist) approach is preferable. But that makes about as much sense as saying that, because restaurants refusing to serve blacks ISN'T as bad as governments making it illegal for restaurants to serve blacks, we therefor don't have to be bothered by restaurants refusing to serve blacks.

Or, to use a more topical example, because the state doesn't forbid women to be wrestlers, the fact that the private WWE corporation doesn't allow women to compete for championship belts is totally cool. Surely, there's a third position we can take here, right...?

Old_Zircon
"... at least until we catch up to Europe's level of thought-control sophistication, and Twitter's "hashtag censorship" starts being used to take down liberal critiques of Islam and misogyny."

Personally I'm not nearly as worried about top-down censorship on social media as I am about the way it empowers mob mentality and has been (and will continue to be) leveraged by extremists of all kinds to socially assassinate their rivals. Like what Gamergaters tried to do to a bunch of people at the height of that, and what people n the left have been doing to academics they don't like (especially evo-psych researchers, who for all I'm skeptical of some of their claims, don't deserve things like false accusations of incest and similar career ending smear campaigns, which can and do happen too often) for over a decade. Titter in particular is a terrifyingly efficient tool for stirring up the 21st century equivalent of a lynch mob.

EvilHomer
That's an interesting perspective, OZ. However, I'm not really sure what you're driving at: are you saying that you're fine with top-down censorship, on the grounds that it is too dangerous to trust the unwashed masses with freedom? Or are you saying that top-down hierarchies aren't the problem in and of themselves, but rather, the problem lies in the potential for the oligarchs at the top to act as mob-inciting demagogues (i.e. the "Soros Effect")?

EvilHomer
Also, Cena: have you checked FB lately? I have a question for you (new question, not really appropriate for poeTV)

John Holmes Motherfucker
>>3. haven't you often and repeatedly come out *in favor* of censorship...? I

FUCK NO. I'm pro-editing. I'm in favor of the right of publishers on the web and elsewhere to set their own editorial standards. This is a fundamental freedom of the press, and if you oppose it, that makes you the one who favors censorship. These people are literally objecting to the freedom of the press, and that's what these deep thinkers always do. They're always trying to control the discourse while painting themselves as the champions of free expression.

John Holmes Motherfucker
So if admitted political censorship is not enforced by the state, but is instead enforced by unaccountable billionaires who run massive for-profit NSA data-mining corporations, you're saying that's OK, Cena?

I'm not saying it's okay, I'm saying it's completely necessary. And it's not just billionaires.

January von Rodeo
(in closing) ANDREW WAKEFIELD, ANOTHER GREAT HERO...
Old_Zircon
They're wrong about pretty much everything else, but they're right about social media being deeply toxic to public discourse. Not for the reasons nor in they ways they're saying but I still agree that any site ostensibly based on the idea of a technologically enforced meritocracy (so anything where visibility is pegged to upvotes/rating/shares/whatever) are best avoided. Especially Reddit, Facebook, Tumblr and Twitter, because they've had time to mature to peak toxicity, but it's a problem that's baked in to the entire design philosophy behind them.
Old_Zircon
I disagree with Jaron Lanier about plenty of stuff, but on this issue I'm fully with him.

Oktay
UPVOTE!!1

(You left out LiveLeak, they even list who voted what so you can go to their channel and let them have it.)

Old_Zircon
I hardly ever use Liveleak because I have to disable basically every privacy-related Firefox extension to make it work and it's usually not worth the hassle. I didn't realize they were so upvote oriented.

Anyhow, the problem of identity politics on the left AND the right has been massively exacerbated by the whole "upvote" paradigm, and I see know reason to expect our new tech overlords to do anything about it as long as it keeps bringing them money and power.

Old_Zircon
Which doesn't lessen the fact that Alex Jones and Billy Corgan are both doofuses.

I still think Gish is a really good album, though.

Old_Zircon
Also, Corgan's starting to look like the product of a Depp/Voight MPreg scenario.

Oktay
Hmm... I only use AdBlock and NoScript, maybe I'm not using enough things? But yeah, it's not worth it. It's a hive mind, and reading the comments will depress you.

I think people think of the upvote button is an agree button. I think it should mean "this is worth talking about even though you might disagree." I also think people, especially kids are starting to live by their upvote score and this makes us avoid controversial subjects. Hello Groupthink!

(I gave up after Siamese Dream. I think they're yet another band ruined by MTV.)

Oktay
Also: Alex Jones has always reminded me of Rush Limbaugh in more ways than one.

Oktay
Oh and Jaron Lanier??? Boy, I hope he saved enough money by now to buy himself a *real* saxophone!! BA-DUM-TSSSS!!

Old_Zircon
Ijust noticed that when I switched to Avast I let it install its browser extension, maybe that's what did it. I have that, ABP, Noscript, Ghostery and Privacy Badger for the hell of it, plus that HTTPS Everywhere one that I forget who made. Not that I'm really worried about surveillance or anything, more just to spite datamining companies and Google.

Old_Zircon
Lately I've also kepy a portable instale of Pale Moon on the desktop so if a site's broken by the Firefox extensions I can use that instead of disabling them, it's just easier.

Old_Zircon
"(I gave up after Siamese Dream. I think they're yet another band ruined by MTV.)"

I like Siamese Dream, too. That's where I lost them. MTV deserves some blame but I think it's really on Corgan. The story is that he spent a year living in his car in a parking garage writing Mellon Collie, which he conceived of as his own The Wall. And unfortunately for his music, he succeeded. Both albums are acceptable if you're a certain kind of 14 year old, but if you're older (and you're me) they're a bunch of overwrought schmaltz punctuated by some really great lad guitar tones courtesy of Gilmour's Space Echo and Corgan's Fender Blender, respectively. The album as a whole is not for me but I can respect it on a certain level. Unfortunately, everything that followed is, well, the Billy Corgan version of Roger Waters' solo career.

Old_Zircon
Alex Jones, Rush Limbaugh, and sometimes Cenk although I do think he's mellowed in his old age, and I'm glad that Sanders interview he did a while back made me give him a second chance because he's still hit and miss but a lot less miss than he used to be.

And shit, for everything about Alex Jones that deserves ridicule, every so often he get stuff about globalism right and he was all over the TPP from the beginning. I'd take him over Limbaugh any day.

Oktay
I agree with what you say about Mellon Collie, it was a good album if you're into that stuff. But I distinctly remember when The Wall came out, all the "grown ups" said it wasn't as good as their other stuff. So maybe it's a great album and we're too old, with onions tied to our belts.

I used to listen to Alex Jones a lot, but always with a weird feeling about him, I felt something was off but I couldn't say what. It was after the Piers Morgan debacle that I finally said "this guy is not what he claims to be." I will still listen to him depending on the guest (eg. Jim Marrs, I can't get enough of him!) but that's about it. Yeah, maybe Limbaugh is a little too insulting but I'm mainly referring to his style, not his ideas. And I like Cenk but I might be a little biased hehehe.

misterbuns
Alex Jones a messy bottom.
crasspm
Is Billy sick? He looks really sick.
Void 71
He has looked like Nosferatu since he shaved his head in the early '90s. If anything, he's aging too slowly.

That guy
Fine, FUCK.

So many things I hate in one video that I didn't even want to drop off these stars for a while.
memedumpster
*poeTV reads my reactions instead of clicking play on a daunting sixteen minute video*

1 Oh man, I actually really wish they were called The Smashing Pumpkins Musical Band.
2 Is Billy Corgan the Darkman?
3 Autism takes guts!
4 What? What commercial can I watch someone get electrocuted in?
4b WHAT!? What commercial has RuPaul eating fetuses!?
4c This video keeps referencing videos I'd rather be watching.
5 The candidates are CGI? What the hell, fedex!?
6,7ish,8esque Is poeTV an Internet ghetto? We need ghetto blaster week, do kids still make those? They should.
9? "Your green penguin rambling" I have no idea what that could mean.

10 HOLY SHIT! Forget the rest of the video and skip straight to 15:40!
John Holmes Motherfucker
Homer: by top-down cenIn your defense, Cena, I will agree that given the choice between hard censorship via the coercive power of the state, verses soft censorship via private hegemony over a technically voluntary sector of the market, the soft censorship (i.e. the libertarian-paternalist) approach is preferable. But that makes about as much sense as saying that, because restaurants refusing to serve blacks ISN'T as bad as governments making it illegal for restaurants to serve blacks, we therefor don't have to be bothered by restaurants refusing to serve blacks.sorship, do you mean people editing their own websites?

By "unaccountable billionaires who run massive for-profit NSA data-mining corporations", so you mean Anita Sarkeesian, refusing to reprint her deranged youtube comments? You're probably talking about facebook, but you'll note that Google generally turns editirial rights over to their users on their respective youtube and blogspot pages. Everyone gets to edit their own pages. I delete any comment on my videos that is a) too stupid to respond to and b) too obnoxious to ignore. I probably delete a comment a year.

There are a lot of bad ways and bad reasons to edit, but deleting political speech on Facebook is way way down near the bootom of the list of bad things billionaires can get away with, and traditionally, editing isn't about thought control, it's about imposing standards.

Without Standards, the internet would be horrible place, choked with abuse, harassment, and character assassination, where people would be actively seeking new ways to vilify their rivals, and threats and insults would be treated as legitimate discourse. See what I did there?

If sites can set their own standards, different sites can have different standards. Why should the Huffington Post have the same rules as 4chan? There are billions of sites on the web. We could have safe spaces, and we could have wild west shooting galleries. .
Register or login To Post a Comment







Video content copyright the respective clip/station owners please see hosting site for more information.
Privacy Statement