Youtube Censorship

I think a bigger issue is lack of embeddability.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SJNVb0GnPI

We generally want to go in the opposite direction of injecting objects into the page

>>62112654
Not a bad idea desu, sounds quite fun to make actually.

>>62112680
Agreed, but I don't think YouTube will budge on the issue. I don't think a YouTube alternative is feasible.

>>62112675
At least they are still providing a link to watch the video. If anything having a big black box saying you can't see the video here might have a Streisand effect.

>>62112708
I would make it personally, it honestly doesn't sound that difficult but I lack the time with work now. I wanted to throw the idea out if any /g/entleman wanted to bite.

The tricky thing would be marketing it and trying to make it popular and not just make the comments / like ratio and echo chamber.

>>62112733
Prepare for a PR nightmare when it gets used exclusively by /pol/ retards that dissuade the general public from actually using it.

>>62112784
To be honest this is the major weak point I am seeing. ((( ))) all over again.

>>62112654
> bypass youtube censorship.
You could also use youtube-dl (or any frontend that uses youtube-dl). Or use any mediaplayer that can play youtube videos directly (mpv).

>Injects its own external comment section with the comments hosted on an external service.
That sounds horrible. Comments sections on places like youtube are dumpster fires. I don't want to read comments on YT or any other site.

Also
>censorship
YT isn't a government. They can decide what that want to show or remove. They have been giving warnings about content for a long time (so called age restrictions). If people don't like their videos being 'censored' then they can use other video sharing services or host the video on a personal server.

Anyway, if you want to get around the annoying message then I would recommend you focus your addon on playing the video. Adding your own comments (from an external service) is just asking for trouble IMO.

>Race Differences in Intelligence
Oh /pol/

Someone start a git repo, LETS DO THIS

File: 140044286_5c4552af8e_edit2-1400x788.jpg (113KB, 1400x788px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 1400x788px

>>62112851
I'm sure this will be as successful as every other collaborative /g/ project...

File: google.handshake.png (68KB, 375x375px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 375x375px

Moderate repub here.

While I don't support extremists, we can't allow our freedom of expression and ideals to be taken away under the false guise of offending someone.

>>62112861
You're going to need a logo.

>>62112831
Comment are probably one of the most potent aspects of a YouTube video as they express sentiment about a given topic. Consider some propaganda video with the top comment being something which is totally against its own narrative.

I agree that YouTube can choose to remove whatever video they want but they are an incredibly powerful service which have monopolized a great deal of portion of information on the internet.

Segmented a video on your own personal server is a great way of never having a discussion and never having any other people see it and having their view points changed.

>Race differences in Intelligence
People laugh now but won't be when it spreads to whatever other information the politically biased YouTube and anti defamation partners deem as 'wrong think'.

File: Steemit.png (8KB, 300x157px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 300x157px

>>62112721
>I don't think a YouTube alternative is feasible.
Could Steemit have a chance? You can post videos and kind of get payed even to partecipate in the community, after all.

https://steemit.com/

>>62112654
>help, a private company hosting a private website won't let me monetize my video where I shout nigger for 50 minutes
>THIS IS CENSORSHIP!

>>62112976
>a private company
*a monopoly. Google should be treated as a monopoly and different laws should apply.

>>62112976
Much easier to burn a straw man than to actually argue.

>>62112996
Yes, because being a "race realist" is a legitimate argument.

>>62112784
You mean the same retards that youtube is exclusively targeting? fuck off, shill

>>62112989
There are other video hosting sites, Google is not a monopoly. Just upload your videos somewhere else

>>62113002
>>62112976
see
>>62112784

>>62113016
>Google is not a monopoly
according to market share, they are

I know it's unrelated but how do video hosting websites make money

>>62113002
>giving a fuck about the "reasons" they put up for doing that shit
Censorship is never justified. NEVER.

>>62113022
Advertisements I think.

>>62112908
>Comment are probably one of the most potent aspects of a YouTube video as they express sentiment about a given topic.
I couldn't disagree more. On popular or trending videos many of the comments are bots. Much of the non-bot posts are "NOTICE ME" or clickbait. In my experience there is rarely every any meaningful discussion...just like on most social media sites.

>they are an incredibly powerful service which have monopolized a great deal of portion of information on the internet.
They are indeed incredibly powerful. They have enough money to fight off lawsuits that kill off many of its competitors. But there are competitors although they are nowhere near as popular.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_video_hosting_services
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_hosting_services

>Segmented a video on your own personal server is a great way of never having a discussion and never having any other people see it and having their view points changed.
As I said before, I think social media is a shitty place to have any serious discourse. If your videos see any kind of popularity then the comments section will be inundated with bullshit. YT is a terrible place to try and have discussion IMO.

>when it spreads to whatever other information the politically biased YouTube and anti defamation partners deem as 'wrong think'.
YT makes money pushing ads. Full stop. They are going to favor content that helps them make money. Anyone with 'fringe' opinions or controversial topics will face more obstacles than some video of a baby dancing to Prince...oh wait, they will have issues as well if someone reports them as violating some dcma bs.

TL;DR
1) youtube only cares about making money.
2) Trying to have a discussion on YT is stupid IMO.

>>62113021
Then stop using YouTube, then it won't be anymore

>>62113105
Ouch! What an argument.

>>62113316
Are you going to sit back and hope for somebody else to solve your problem or are you going to become the change you want to see in the world?

>>62113387
Someone should have told that to the fucking niggers

Instead niggers got laws changed that forced people to have to associate with them and people called it ""progress"".

Loss of freedoms is progress.

>>62113387
OP here. I'll probably code it little by little.

>>62113023
It's not censorship when a private company refuses to let you use their platform you fucking dunce.

File: spike in views.jpg (25KB, 640x321px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 640x321px

>>62112675
Interesting to see this enormous spike in view count for this video.

>>62112831
If google was a country, its gdp would make it the 66th largest country in the world.

at some point with how powerful these companies are, google especially where they have near complete control of the internet through ads and ad revenue, we have to stop seeing them as a company that can do anything they want because 'they aint the goberment they cant censor, only the goberment can'

>>62113462
>civil rights legislation forces everything from public services to even my small business to serve African Americans
>free speech? LOL this is a private enterprise bucko, who cares if it's a practically a monopoly and there are no alternatives

File: this_isnt_even_my_final_form.png (65KB, 980x488px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 980x488px

>>62113475
>we have to stop seeing them as a company that can do anything they want
I don't think anyone ITT has implied that Google (Alphabet) can do anything they want. The OP used the word "censorship". I don't think want Youtube is doing is censorship, if I allow others to use my servers for free then I have the right to dictate what content they get to upload. And if I want to add a warning that is well within my rights.

Youtube/Google/Alphabet does a lot of shady things. Adding warning labels doesn't fall under the category of shady IMO. Furthermore, if people don't like YT/Google/Alphabet policies then they should *avoid* using YT/Google/Alphabet services and software.

>Youtube is bad because of reasons, but I have to use them because they are so popular.
That doesn't make sense to me. YMMV.

>>62113625
>I don't think anyone ITT has implied that Google (Alphabet) can do anything they want. The OP used the word "censorship". I don't think want Youtube is doing is censorship, if I allow others to use my servers for free then I have the right to dictate what content they get to upload. And if I want to add a warning that is well within my rights.

You have the only, and biggest platform for hosting user made content, by a VERY wide margin, and so far its operating at a loss, so if any other company that does not have resources to absorb a 2-5 billion dollar a year loss takes some of the youtube market, they will be in the same boat without the ability to absorb the loss.

Like it or not, youtube is a very important thing that google is gifting people either because they also see the good it can do, or because they get such good data its worth the billions loss. or possibly they saw a chance to be able shape a narrative and are playing a long game, I have no clue.

as for 'you don't like google/alphabet services, stop using it' there isn't much of an option out there anymore, with many of the alternatives piggybacking off google's own data.


Google became a monopoly, there are competitors, but that's like saying a baby is a contender in a heavyweight boxing match because it put on gloves.

>>62113002
unless he outright lies about everything in the video, nothing he said was blatantly wrong.

File: 1503740485221.jpg (120KB, 816x980px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 816x980px

>>62113625
>Adding warning labels doesn't fall under the category of shady IMO
It's not just warning labels, it's actively making sure the content gets buried.
The entire goal of this is to make sure that the masses (normies) don't get exposed to certain ideas, lest they become normalized, while also pushing their own propoganda (creators for change).
Google has even stated that people searching for controversial topics will, in the future, be directed to a curated playlist trying to "steer them in the right direction".
And besides, nobody can goe toe-to-toe with google because of their vast resources, except MAYBE Facebook, but we all know how Zuck is about free speech.

File: 1479785560628.jpg (8KB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 320x320px

Lauching an alternative is off the table. It will get hijacked by /pol/tards and his masters and it will basically be career suicide for the founder, and unlike moot, google won't be hiring anyone involved.

It is not impossible, it's just that no one is willing to take the burden of being the messiah for the rednecks and modern eugenics of the world. No one wants to build a platform for these kind of people.

Not to mention that this all is just a fad.

File: c6a41758a4efea25a76876f8a134886d.jpg (222KB, 800x989px) Image search: [Google]

222KB, 800x989px

How about stop trusting large corporations to believe in high ideals?

Also stop being a brainlet and read.

If you are not concerned about any of this you really need to read Huxley's brave new world and Orwell's 1984
Also read Solzhenitsyn's Gulag Archipelago while you're at it

File: 1491312134348.jpg (73KB, 1080x1349px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 1080x1349px

>>62112654
Maybe it's time to accept that you /pol/ racists are a minority unwanted by the rest of us?
If you hate YT so much, just stop using it and use something else.

>>62113938
It's that no one can afford it. Even Google can't afford Youtube, and its PB after PB of bandwidth every second, and its data centres as large as a warehouse.

>>62113998
>reading

If people read there wouldn't be so much panic over a video-hosting site.

>>62113746
>You have the only, and biggest platform for hosting user made content, by a VERY wide margin, and so far its operating at a loss, so if any other company that does not have resources to absorb a 2-5 billion dollar a year loss takes some of the youtube market, they will be in the same boat without the ability to absorb the loss.
YT is the largest service for hosting user made video content. That doesn't change the fact that you or I don't a right to post our content there. If YT wants to add a warning, they get to do that. If YT wants to remove a video, they get to do that (for the most part).

>youtube is a very important thing that google is gifting people either because
YT is free because they make money off of ads.

>there isn't much of an option out there anymore,
There are plenty of options. Refer to the wikipedia links above. You may not like the other options because they don't reach as large of an audience as YT. But they are still options. Don't use YT if you don't like YT.

Personally, I don't find YT to be all that important. I'll watch movie trailers when they are released. I'll use YT to download music (muh bitrate). And I'll watch silly clips from shows. If YT closed down tomorrow, I really wouldn't care. It isn't important to me.

Some people use youtube as a way to earn a living. Other use it to push an agenda. I can see how changes in YT's policy would affect those groups. But YT's hardware and software don't belong to those groups...they aren't entitled to the service.

Every year or so YT does something that pisses off content creators. Some move on to other services. Most stay. And the cycle continues. If you aren't happy with YT I would suggest you move on and not waste time with an addon that continues to use the very service you don't like. If the content is any good then it will resonate with people, regardless of the platform it is hosted on.

>>62112910
dtube is good as fuck. but god the setup has a weird process that needs to be normie as fuck to setup.

>>62113938
but there are alternatives already?

>>62114043
Bullshit. It's the opposite. If people started to read more they would care about this shit more. Because it's important.

File: 1473394125214.png (239KB, 626x618px) Image search: [Google]

239KB, 626x618px

Anyone know anything about LBRY? Could it replace youtube?

>>62114012
(you)
That's how it starts, idiot.

>>62113068
This "fringe opinions don't make money" meme is bullshit. It's the opposite. Shit that make people angry get shared way more. The reasons are political and the responsibles are trying to push an agenda.

https://youtube.com/watch?v=rE3j_RHkqJc

>>62114171
If people read more they'd realise that video does not lend itself to serious discourse and the idea that "political opinions are censored on video site" would be regarded as silly, because why would you put political opinions in such an unsuitable medium?

>>62114331
Are you fucking retarded? Videos are a very good medium, and yes it's perfect for political opinions. It's been used for decades and it works. Denying that is just idiotic.

>>62114398
Are you seriously defending what passes for political discourse these days? All what has happened is that they've turned "debates" into crowd pleasing platitudes, and broadcasts into advertisements.

The politician's way of speaking, in which they don't answer a question, but sound like they have, would never fly in written form.

>>62113802
>It's not just warning labels, it's actively making sure the content gets buried.
Yes, that is an issue for any content creator. How do you get people to notice your videos when 300 hours of video are uploaded to YT every minute. And add to that the "algorithms" that are used to determine what is trending and what shows up as related videos. But that isn't an issue only faced by controversial content creators...almost all content creators have to deal with that.

>The entire goal of this is to make sure that the masses (normies) don't get exposed to certain ideas, lest they become normalized, while also pushing their own propoganda (creators for change).
The only goal, from the perspective of YT, is to make money. What gets buried and what gets pushed to the top is motivated by profit.

My head is starting to spin. So just to summarize:
>YT censorship
>YT comments are "most potent aspects of a YouTube video as they express sentiment about a given topic"
>Pointless to use anything other than YT
>YT is politically biased
>YT is so big we must stop seeing them as a company when they censor content
>YT is so big you have to use them, no other real choices
>YT actively buries content deemed controversial
>No one can go toe-to-toe with YT...too big
I don't agree with some of the above. But that seems to be the gist.

>>62114469
>written form
Writing things down doesn't make anything more true or less able to be bullshitted.
Politicians, since the invention of spin doctors, will avoid questions no matter what medium it is served on.

>>62114469
Bullshit. Every political article on a partisan newspaper is on the same level of a politician's speeches, if not lower. You can find crowd pleasing "debates" there as well, or on the social networks where shit is in written form as well. Are facebook or twitter posts better than tv debates now just because it's written stuff?

>>62112654
How do you even watch the video?
Is it some sort of notpron exercise?

>>62112654
Why don't we just find an alternative and start using it?
>>62114183
This looks nice, what is it?

forgetting the alt-right garbage for a second, youtube channels like Forgotten Weapons are utilising alternate sources of revneue like patreon since they know youtube has been purposefully shitting on those with troubling content. For example, content like forgotten weapons, which is a documentary series on lesser known firearms. But it's linked with constitutional rights via the 2nd amendment and this is troubling to youtube.

File: youtube-alternatives-v1.3.png (711KB, 1600x3759px) Image search: [Google]

711KB, 1600x3759px

You can just do what youtuble-dl/newpipe/hooktube does and then embed some comment thing. We already thought about this, OP. We were going to call it ShoahTube.

Anyone know of a relatively efficient or clever way to scan for censored videos? I'd like to promote them on my tube type site.

>>62114810
I mean as in harvesting them, easy enough to determine if a particular video is censored.

>>62114750
This. The people crying about the "nazis" don't get that that's only the start. "first they came for x and I said nothing because y" et cetera.

>>62114785
I guess you could add Steemit and >>62114183 to the infographic as well (even if I never tried the second one).

>>62114810
>>62114823
What site? I'm interested. I don't know how to get those videos, tho. Sorry.

>>62114823
Steemit's video site is called Dtube and its already on there. Btw it requires a phone number to sign up so its shit.

Haven't tried LBRY yet. I'll try it out.

File: thrthrthrthrth.png (2MB, 1571x761px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1571x761px

>>62114853
HookTube. Just started redesigning in bootstrap which will take a few days (completely new to modern design stuff).

>>62113469
Yeah, but thats because its the first instance. The spike in views will become less and less for further censored videos. It may kind of cause Streisand effect at this point, but eventually it will be effective.

>>62114907
>Steemit's video site is called Dtube and its already on there
https://dtube.video/? What is already on there? I couldn't find a list of censored videos.

Sidenote, dtube.video doesn't show up on the first few pages of duckduckgo when searching for dtube.

>>62114723
http://lbry.io
It's a protocol for content distribution and discovery that uses the blockchain

>>62115088
I meant its already on the infographic.

Also, you can find the race/intelligence video on BitChute complete with comments and memes.

https://www.bitchute.com/video/qzEkR1UJKU90/

File: 1475030186064.png (120KB, 819x490px) Image search: [Google]

120KB, 819x490px

>>62112654
Scientific facts are now banned on Google's properties. Make sure you install AdNauseam and fight back.

adnauseam.io

>>62114978
>HookTube
Is there a way to add my subscriptions YT RSS file to Hooktube or some other site? I don't even wanna go to YT anymore.

>large corporation isn't nice

HOLY SHIT STOP THE PRESSES

Maybe making yourself reliant on them was a bad idea, huh?

File: le-just-make-your-own-meme.png (47KB, 758x193px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 758x193px

>>62115217
wtf i love choices now

>>62115217

nah this is unprecedented

even microsoft weren't this stupid

>>62115315
>taken down from any git repo
Reminds of when C+= got taken down from github. It was just a spec for a "feminist programming language" with rules based on intersectionality/mental illness. It was made because a feminist had written an article demanding someone make one.

>>62115315
Go fuck yourself. I've been against centralisation of the web for years and everyone started telling me I was an autist for hating convenience.

Well now these people that YOU have given all the power to and using this power, and you're complaining?

>>62115386
C+= was intentional satire

File: 1489143114506.jpg (32KB, 475x500px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 475x500px

>>62114750
Now they're also mass-demonetizing male weightlifting and fitness channels, and I believe some male self-improvement channels. That's very obviously the work of the feminist whackos who infest the company, and you don't have to be >muh alt-right to see that it's very political.

>>62115401
wtf i love centralization now

>>62114114
>>youtube is a very important thing that google is gifting people either because
>YT is free because they make money off of ads.
youtube operates at a multi billion dollar loss, they make no profit from it.

>>62115414
Yeah I know, I ran the main twitter for it for a while.

>>62115442
>they make no profit from it.
They may not earn a profit. But there are ads. And people/companies pay to have their ads shown. They make money from ads.

>>62115434
Again, you're to blame. If you didn't encourage their growth they'd never have the power that they do. This is the end-point of the web as it has been becoming over the last 15 years.

>>62115508
And if people don't want their ads associated with this stuff? Should they accept a loss on these videos just out of charity?

File: kjhkjhkj.png (32KB, 726x507px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 726x507px

>>62115207
Doing some research on it atm but looks like a nightmare so far.

>>62115517
I've only ever visited dogfisting.net and this website. I guess I should have branched out.

>>62115207
https://github.com/mewfree/youtube-dl-subscriptions

>>62115442
>>62115508
stop spouting this meme, it's not true. Maybe it was true years ago, when google first acquired youtube, but there's no way they'd have kept it up this long without getting something from it. Maybe they don't profit directly, but between ads and user data they must be making millions from youtube alone

>>62115517
>And if people don't want their ads associated with this stuff? Should they accept a loss on these videos just out of charity?
I'm not following you anon.

>>62115573
some proof
http://www.latimes.com/business/technology/la-fi-tn-google-youtube-20161027-story.html
>YouTube's annual revenue has reached $10 billion and is increasing by as much as 40% a year. The growth makes YouTube “one of the strongest assets fundamentally on the Internet today,” Mahaney wrote in a research note this week.

That was a year ago, they're probably making twice that amount now

>>62114978
when will playlists work, senpai

I really fear this bullshit will leak to their search engine.

I own a travel site about amsterdam. And tourists of course want to know where you can find weed and hookers. Thats what Amsterdam is known for after all. But if google would suddenly decide its mature or sensitive content then you lose all your traffic.

>>62115630
>That was a year ago, they're probably making twice that amount now
Nope. Advertisers pulled out and YT lost billions.

what about liveleak? do they remove videos for hate speech?

>>62115758
It all started with bogus claims that pewdiepie was a Nazi.

>>62115776
No. They don't remove anything... except copyrighted shit.

>>62115786
>It all started with bogus claims that pewdiepie was a Nazi.
Yeah, WSJ/NYTimes/DailyMail planned a coordinated attack on alternative media in an effort to divert advertising $$$ to old media.

>>62115776
It would suck if liveleak got turned into just another tube. It's beautiful as is.

>>62115776
They host videos of dead chinese kids getting run over, so I don't imagine they would. However, liveleak hasn't had the nazi test yet. I don't know how fast they'd bend the knee.

>>62113482
>he actually thinks he's entitled to shout nigger for 50 minutes
>on a private company's website
>where he agreed to the terms of service and the community guidelines
(You)

>>62115904
Bake that cake you libertarian bigot!

We need to get onboard with dtube

https://dtube.video/#!/v/transisto/umy3s54n

>>62115946 (You)
>Bake that cake you libertarian bigot!
wow. i'm sure plenty of people here (and elsewhere) will get what you just said.

>>62115819
who would come up with such schemes?

>>62114183
>>62115114
I just got it installed now, looks pretty nice. There doesn't seem to be a comment system but the UI they've designed is very sleek (even it it's written in the electron meme)

It looks like it also downloads the videos to your machine for offline viewing, rather than just a temporary directory. I don't know if you can set it up so that it's a temp directory or you have to manually clear it if it gets too full. The cryptocurrency credit system is cool too. I'm not sure how viable it is with the current stability of crypto though.

Overall for something so early in development (they just opened it for testing in April), it has a lot of potential, I can see myself using this more and more if enough content creators get on board

>>62116845
Some other things I've noticed, there's no video length or upload date, and the search function is shit. They devs have some work to do if this is going to be popular. It might work better as an alternative to torrents than to youtube itself

>>62116835
we know who (((they))) are.

add &bpctr=9223372036854775807; to bypass the warning screen

>>62112654
Why not quit watching Youtube? There's very little quality content to begin with. Vlog culture is cancer.

>>62115041
Effective at what?

>>62113022
They don't

To learn who your oppressors are, you must learn whom you cannot criticize.

For the OP content, and topics of that nature, it's wrong to assume the ones who aren't allowed to be criticized are those discussed in OPs video. Contrary, it's right to assume those people are a protected class under the oppressors.

>>62112654
Most games have more server-client interaction protections than youtube. It's (relatively) easy to refunction the website so that the video streams simply have to go through restrictions.

>>62114750
Exactly. I'm just a stupid gaming channel but over 300 of my videos have been censored and it's just fucking video games! I even dub over any cursing! They are all autoflagging because of what game it is or if it has guns or the title had the word pistol or grenade or kill montage or battle.

Fucking literally anything slightly violent even cartoon violence is now censored. This is fucking ridiculous. Even if a thumbnail is flagged on a video attaching that thumbnail to another video will autoflag the video. I think even my unique tag for my channel is possibly blacklisted now. Making MY FUCKING IDENTITY AN AUTOFLAG TERM.

As if I'm some nazi altright terrorist or something. This is bullshit man. I've done nothing wrong not do I contribute to any of this shit.

File: cloudflare.jpg (81KB, 750x634px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 750x634px

>>62114540
>almost all content creators have to deal with that.
"Restricted' videos are actively prevented from having comments, being able to search for the video, embedding, and sharing.
A normie small channel is only suppressed by natural forces and can still be allowed to gain popularity on the platform, wheras YouTube is going out of their way to keep creators of "restricted" videos at the bottom and actively preventing their dissemination.
All of this done over the guise of "preventing extremism".

File: free.png (130KB, 582x593px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 582x593px

>>62114012
>muh /pol/ racists
>minority unwanted by "the rest of us"

By that logic, we should have free reign to deport all muslims, blacks, hispanics, etc., because they're minorities that everybody hates.

>>62113780
It was misleading and incomplete just to push his argument. Also this is not tech related

pol should stay in /pol/

>>62112654
Do they at least tell you why exactly your ad revenue was taken down?

>>62120877
Even this website has become moderated by such blind fools you cannot have a real, unbiased factual discussion about human sub-species genetics on /sci/ without some highschool age pseudo-intellectual poser reporting everything they've been taught to burn to the mods and janis.
People used to disagree with the idea that the Sun revolved around the Earth. They used to imprison and torture scientists and enlightened thinkers whom showed evidence that the King was not God in man's form, that the decrees of the Church were incorrect, and that rational thinking was equivalent to disobeying the royal.

On matters such as these, sub-species genetics are the sun and earth. The belief that nobody is inherently different is the same unscientific belief that the Sun revolves and the Earth is the center of the universe. Some countries jail the vocal (the UK), and many places and companies silence (torture) the vocal.
A majority opinion (the king is god) is no less correct because more people have been led to believe it.

If you really think happy feelings and forced college and job quotas are going to fix anyone's problems in the long term you're just as stupid and foolish as the peasants of the middle ages.

Raise a bear in a cage all it's life (society protecting the weaker through social programs), giving it all it needs to drink and eat (forced quota programs in all walks of life), and release it into the woods. Will it be a better hunter, do you think, from being handed everything? Will it be able to grasp the social behaviors of wild bears whom had no help to survive?
Or will it be incapable of surviving, raising a family of properly educated cubs whom are taught how to behave for the success of the species?

My posts tend to get threads deleted quickly - so I must be doing something right about the argument -
I only ask that you reflect that my words aren't written with hidden meanings and "between the lines" subtlety, and to think deeply about everything.

>>62119978
>free rein
L2Engrish.

>>62121485
its very rare to have such high quality posts these days