YouTube’s Censorship
It’s no secret that YouTube has become one of the most censored platforms on the internet since the #FakePandemic of 2020 began. Many channels have been completely shut down or forced to stop talking about certain subjects.
A strong three strikes rule has scared a lot of YouTube channels into changing subjects.
Is YouTube a Private Business?
Some have said because YouTube is a private company, they have the right to control the content on their platform. For example, the BBC news said “YouTube is not a public forum with guaranteed free speech”.
We would agree that if they were a truly private company, taking no government subsidies, receiving no government favors, with no control handed over to government, this would be true. Otherwise, the tax payers (where the subsidies and favors come from) may have a lot to say about what is happening at YouTube as much as they would any other government institution that attempts to control their lives.
Truly private institutions have jurisdiction over their own private affairs. But does this apply to YouTube? Definitely not. This same principle is why the federal government claims power to make rules to control private universities that take federal funds. Because that money represents the tax payers, they control who they give money to allegedly on behalf of the people.
This same principle is why the founding fathers threw the tea in the harbor from the East India Trading company. Even though they were a private company, they were actually acting on behalf of the British king and receiving favors from the the king, which resulted in the theft of the livelihoods of the colonists for the benefit of the king and his friends. Legalized Plunder.
YouTube’s Trusted Flagger Program
YouTube’s own policies show that it is not just YouTube’s private opinion that shuts down speech on YouTube. But they have a program where they directly give government agencies and NGOs access to shut down free speech. NGOs usually refer to United Nations “Non Governmental Organizations”.
Here you can see, YouTube’s “Trusted Flagger Program” explicitly describes the following in incredibly plain language regarding how they censor content.
– YouTube provides tools to government agencies
– YouTube provides tools to NGOs
– These agencies tell YouTube what to censor
– Government agencies use a form, provided by YouTube, to contact YouTube directly, to tell them what content to censor
The Constitution
Isn’t all of this unconstitutional?
Clearly, government regulating free speech is a direct violation of the 1st Amendment to the US Constitution, plain as day.
Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press
The Utah constitution also makes this illegal if any Utah agencies are participating
No law shall be passed to abridge or restrain the freedom of speech or of the press
Lawmakers and state institutions have clear constitutional restrictions placed upon them. They lose their legitimacy when they allow breaches of these restrictions to become common place.
Mike Lee and Fundamental Violations of Freedoms
A simple google search will show many articles where Utah Senator Mike Lee has allegedly tried to fight against this “big tech” censorship, although there’s clearly been no success in these efforts as the censorship has only gotten worse.
It might be instructive to point out the similarities in our report where Mike Lee wrote the very bill (USA Freedom Act) that allowed “big tech” to violate our basic fourth amendment freedoms (privacy and requiring warrants for searches). He moved NSA spying from government agencies directly to, instead, use private companies as a proxy. This only gave the government a cover story. Now they would claim they weren’t breaking the law anymore, even though the same thing was happening using the “private” companies–and the spying has only gotten worse.
So we see the pattern (of private proxy companies) used in the USA Freedom Act to violate the fourth amendment is the same pattern used in this case with YouTube to violate the first amendment.
——————————–
To make sure you don’t miss our content, as YouTube has been continuously giving Defending Utah a hard time, subscribe to us on these alternative platforms.
Rumble https://rumble.com/c/DefendingUtah
Bitchute https://www.bitchute.com/channel/FiXxiHi396aJ/
6 Responses
Fascism is the government wanting to control speech and using private companies as a proxy to do it.
Fascism is the Right of communism as Socialism is the Left of communism.
Fascism is what we’ve seen in recent years, from covid restrictions to government subsidized monopolies like Apple, Google, Facebook, Twitter, Tesla, SpaceX, etc.
Jan 6th insurrection hoax and the subsequent imprisonment without trial of patriots merely peacefully protesting is another fascist play. So is the funneling of billions to Nazi governed Ukraine.
Not a criticism, but FYI… Fascism and Communism are both Socialist, fascism is the “right” and communism is the “left”. They are the two wings of authoritarian, tyrannical, socialist dictatorship.
Fascists take power and impose socialism by manipulating, subverting, bullying, twisting, and misusing the democratic electoral process, as did Italy and Germany in the 1930’s; while communists do so by forcing and imposing socialism by revolution…
In modern America, we are turning solidly Fascist/Socialist, like Venezuela did, also by election, as the post above shows ~ as opposed to revolutionary Communist/Socialist like Russia, China, and Cuba did. The very interesting twist is China turning into some kind of hybrid where communism is morphing into fascism. Still socialist tyranny…
Thanks for your thoughts.
Your definitions of fascism and communism are completely incorrect. You’re using one of the most common misunderstandings of the left/right spectrum, that the elite use to confuse so many issues. Please watch this short video on the political spectrum, and then return to this discussion.
(10 minutes)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klm6yZxDmJc
If that link ever goes dead, the full 30 min video can be found here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIl57cchRqs
Thanks for the link and the re-invite. Well that was interesting, a decent, while brief expose of differing ideas and perspectives about government, from monarchy to anarchy. And the “spectrum”, from total-to-no government is fairly standard fare, plus the invention of something he calls “constitutional moderates in the middle”. But that spectrum says nothing correct about “left or right”, as the terms are used politically today, only about how he uses them in the video. And the entire video/discussion is off-point from what I brought up.
I made no claims about a “spectrum”. I only pointed out that communists and nazis and fascists are ALL tyrannical, socialist, dictatorships ~ whether by one-man, oligarchy, democracy, or republic, or “democratic-republic”…
When you read Karl Marx, his goal was to get to socialism through the leftist, communist, revolution, and it’s dictatorship of the proletariat. Mussolini’s fascism was rightist, and socialist, through-and-through. So was Hitler’s fascist “National Socialist German Workers’ Party” (NAZI). Both fascist states were elected, not imposed by revolution. Still, commies or nazis, they are socialists all.
The fascists hate the communists, and the communists hate the fascists (Hitler’s gang jailed and killed the commies off before starting in on the Jews – the concentration camps were built for commies…) ~ yet they are all socialist ideologues who want to get to a socialist utopia by the application of their “pure” doctrines and methods… These are the “fascist right” and “communist left” of the “total government” idea from the video’s “spectrum”. They are the 2 sides of the “total government” coin, or spectrum. Yet, they both have the “rule of law”, and rule they do !
On a separate 2-sided coin, or to borrow the term, on a different spectrum, are what we might term “classical liberals”, or the “conservatives” of recent history, and the “liberals” of recent history. (Each type of government is it’s own coin, or spectrum, with it’s own left and right…) The main argument here, since the early 1960’s has been over bigger or smaller government, more tax-and-spend vs. less; but no argument (until now) about the form and application of limited (if expanding) constitutional, democratic, republican, rule-of-law government.
Thus the liberals and conservatives are the left and right of the “constitutional moderates” of the video’s “spectrum”… (The left and right of the video’s “no government” spectrum would probably be better known as Libertarians and Anarchists.) The idea that there is only one, left-to-right, 2-dimensional political spectrum is deeply flawed, very restrictive of any useful application, and leads to terrible misunderstanding !
I stand by my original comments, that: Fascists and Communists are all socialists, as they all admit (and as your linked video shows them in the same stack in the total government side); and that the modern US is jumping from one coin or spectrum of more-or-less limited constitutional government, to another one of authoritarian, tyrannical, “total government” socialist dictatorship, with it’s own internal “right and left”.
Which brings us back quite neatly to the original, if unstated idea of your post: That YouTube’s censorship is part of a fascistic, state/business, hand-in-glove, government operation ~ as we drift into the elected, non-revolutionary, “rightist” side of socialistic, authoritarian, tyrannical, total government…
The term used politically today, is an invented term, used to confuse the people. If you embrace it, you will be led along by the media. The spectrum in the video is an accurate spectrum based on something measurable (how much government control) not based on opinion and what the popular talking heads are saying.
Fascism and Communism, are both on the “total government” side. Removing left/right thinking is the first step to stepping out of the matrix.
uncle Albert, you’re correct left/right is relative to each government form and means something different than the traditional left/right of our usurped republic. and Mr. Moore is correct that many get confused between left/right application between various entities. However, I think we generally agree in principle on the two sides of communism that both essentially want control under the principles of communism but with their individual takes on it. they do fight each other, and they often use the same methods and monikers interchangeably. usually the point they fight each other is after they have worked together to overthrow the working governments of nations. Karl Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto and I identified that base ideology as communism, under which the left/right of this entity is two authoritarian sides named socialism and fascism that have evolved since the time of Marx. Whether we call it communism or socialism is up for debate, but the underlying principles we both agree on, I think. Thank you for your comments, I read them through and find them thoughtful and sincere. I also enjoyed Mr. Moore’s video which illustrates the importance of a balanced use of restrained government based on the principles of law that protect the whole by protecting every individual right.