Live data from Hacker News

YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

twitter.com

81–90 of 298 posts

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#81

I hope HN doesn’t become the next place conspiracy theories are peddled.

What is the conspiracy theory you see being peddled here? The theory that the video was shadow banned as a result of its content, or the theories presented in the video itself?

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#82
post #53
post #17

Talk about the military industry, crime financial complex, pretexts to war or history of US foreign policy - anything with actual weight that isn't just "culture wars" - and see yourself get delisted from Google, smeared in the media, then get harassed by various agencies until you either flee the country or end up like Hastings or car bombed like Daphne. There is only freedom of speech until you actually go against…

>Talk about the military industry, crime financial complex, pretexts to war or history of US foreign policy [...] and see yourself get delisted from Google, smeared in the media, then get harassed by various agencies uhh, what? You frequently see posts critical of all of those on reddit and hn, and to my knowledge the things you've listed didn't happen to them.

The ones that delve into the really juicy parts have it harder: Julian Assange fights extradition after being holed up in an embassy for years, Edward Snowden had to claim asylum in Russia, Reality Winner got locked up, Chelsea Manning got jailed for a year for refusing to testify against Assange, ABC and a journalist got raided by police in Australia, Indymedia Linksunten got dissolved as a "criminal enterprise" by the German state, Daphne Caruana Galizia got carbombed for going against the highest elites of Maltese society...

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you? Not to over simplify things, but freedom, liberty, and equal treatment were pretty much empty words and applied only to white American men (see: treatment of Native Americans, the Mexican-American war, slaves, and women). Federalists were very clear in their commentary and design of the Constitution that they were in favor of broad federal powers and feared populism and direct democracy. The Bill of Rights wa…

I would add one additional qualifier to your statement, it was wealthy white men, not merely white men. To the extent we tend to project the past onto the present, it doesn't make sense to see a random white male construction worker as part of this powerful elite who was denying women the right to vote or enslaving anyone. It was a very small number of people who had power, and like all people in power, wrote rules t…

This is actually a really interesting point/question, and it's one that doesn't have an easy answer. It's true that, overall, most slaves (in pre-civil-war US) were owned by a small number of plantations. But in some southern states, nearly half the White families owned at least one slave. In those families, obviously the women and children didn't themselves "own" any slaves, but they nevertheless controlled that person's labor. Similarly, wealthy plantation owners frequently rented their slaves to poorer whites. So even a relatively unprivileged class of White people benefited from slave labor directly despite themselves getting a raw deal relative to the land owners.

But ultimately, the south fought a civil war in order to preserve the institution of slavery because it was the fundamental organization of society on top of which the economy was built, and many non-elite white men nevertheless allied themselves with this effort.

As for projecting the past, I don't know. It's certainly plausible that White people today are still reaping the benefits that were established by slavery and racism in a broad, systemic sense. As far as I know, my relatives didn't own slaves, but my relatives did do things like get mortgages that Black people couldn't do. That doesn't seem fair does it? It's a little bit like inheriting stolen property. But if you go back far enough, what isn't stolen property?

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People like yourself that constantly bring up the wrongs of the past and constantly remind people that things were less than perfect in the past constantly don't seem to understand that: * Much like many things society progresses, generally in the western world that progression has tended towards greater liberty (in most respects) of its citizens e.g. Tom Holland (a documentary film maker in the UK) argues the separa…

> People like yourself You mean people who are interested in analysis of history? You don't want to consider it. That's fine...oh wait...what about: > Some argue the separation of church and state can be traced back to the bible Some people argue people rode Dinosaurs. That's about as compelling, as well. For the most of the cultures that contributed to writing portions of the Bible, religious text was law. > remind…

You are 100% correct on your last comment and thank you for correcting me. Patrick Henry's comments were related to the absence of the Bill of Rights and was an Anti-Federalist. Not sure how I conflated the two, but apologies to anyone that feels misled.

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#85

The shadow ban isn’t even the scariest part of the thread! The Department of Homeland Security confronted him about a video about police brutality: > A few months ago I uploaded a video about police brutality. It showed explicit acts of violence by the police, and it was understandably age-gated. The video was appropriate only for older audiences, but did not break any of YouTube's terms and conditions. > That video…

Well I have encountered this article a while ago - "How CIA made Google":

https://medium.com/insurge-intelligence/how-the-cia-made-goo...

From this perspective, youtube blocking CIA criticizing video seems like something completely normal.

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely ridiculous - do Americans even know why the country was even founded anymore?

Do you? Not to over simplify things, but freedom, liberty, and equal treatment were pretty much empty words and applied only to white American men (see: treatment of Native Americans, the Mexican-American war, slaves, and women). Federalists were very clear in their commentary and design of the Constitution that they were in favor of broad federal powers and feared populism and direct democracy. The Bill of Rights wa…

While I agree with a lot of your comments, I was alarmed by your Patrick Henry misquote. He was arguing FOR the Bill of Rights, not against it.

https://wwnorton.com/college/history/america7_brief/content/...

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#88

Just watched the video, read the thread. Here are some thoughts. First of all, the video uploader is promoting a competitor to YouTube. This is not disclaimed clearly. The video goes over criticism to the CIA, which are fair enough. But it takes some things as axioms, for example, that only the US are interfering/meddling in the world. He presents it as "the US is the bad guy and the world would be fair without the C…

>First of all, the video uploader is promoting a competitor to YouTube. This is not disclaimed clearly.

If you're referring to the nebula ad at the end, he and other youtubers have been advertising it for months, if not years now. No other video with a nebula ad has been shadow banned like this.

Also, trying to paint this as "Youtube isn't promoting it" is disingenuous. Youtube is hiding it from people who've explicitly asked to be notified about his videos.

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#89
post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I think it's "anti-American" to deliberately editorialize and misrepresent the police as illegally violent and biased, when the facts are otherwise: - black people kill black people far more than police or white people kill black people, but the dominant story about it is, police violence is at fault - police have to deal with 1000s of violent encounters with unstable and dangerous individuals every week, and asi…

"why isn't there as much outrage over the few dozen police killed every year as there is over the nearly 2k people killed by police?" There are roughly 20k violent deaths in the US every year. Almost 10% of those are police related. That's completely unacceptable to me, having looked at the actual numbers. https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2020/06/65309/ has the underlying sources and analysis here.

The police aren’t the causality though, they’re a component of response to crime. Crime is the issue and that will never be a 0 sum thing.

Re: YouTube shadowbans video titled “The CIA is a Terrorist Organization”

#90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely ridiculous - do Americans even know why the country was even founded anymore?

Do you? Not to over simplify things, but freedom, liberty, and equal treatment were pretty much empty words and applied only to white American men (see: treatment of Native Americans, the Mexican-American war, slaves, and women). Federalists were very clear in their commentary and design of the Constitution that they were in favor of broad federal powers and feared populism and direct democracy. The Bill of Rights wa…

I think what you’re saying goes to show that the US needs to go beyond the idea that it’s a great country because of its founding myths.

Americans need to define greatness based on what they are and what values they currently promote, as opposed to basing it on hagiographies of about 20 men from the 18th century.

Post reply on HN