Censoring of Conservative Voices by Social Media et al.

[Dark Lightning]

I've never been one to follow politics much. I'd listen to what the candidates said and voted accordingly. My brother, on the other hand, will argue for the sake of arguing. He's well informed from the conservative side (Rush Limbaugh, etc.) He's rational about other things but I think he takes the spewing verbatim.

He may have changed in the past three years, I don't know. I'm not up for debates anymore. It is taxing.

One of my younger brothers was listening to Rush one time when I was visiting, and Rush was spouting off about Obama's "Totalitarian Regime". People actually believe Rush when he says this crap- I know some people in my carving class at the senior center who quote him. Damn. 

[Randy]

I've never been one to follow politics much. I'd listen to what the candidates said and voted accordingly. My brother, on the other hand, will argue for the sake of arguing. He's well informed from the conservative side (Rush Limbaugh, etc.) He's rational about other things but I think he takes the spewing verbatim.

He may have changed in the past three years, I don't know. I'm not up for debates anymore. It is taxing.

One of my younger brothers was listening to Rush one time when I was visiting, and Rush was spouting off about Obama's "Totalitarian Regime". People actually believe Rush when he says this crap- I know some people in my carving class at the senior center who quote him. Damn. 

I haven't heard him quote Rush but there was a time when he grew a vegetable garden because Bill Clinton was going to ruin the economy or some such nonsense.

[Tom62]

I think that Rowan Atkinson summarises very good in this video, why free speech is so important and why it is bad to censor it.

[Old Seer]

I have a hunch that if Owens would have accused Trump of being a thug there would have been no consequences from Go Fund Me floks.

[Dark Lightning]

I have a hunch that if Owens would have accused Trump of being a thug there would have been no consequences from Go Fund Me floks.

She wouldn't be wrong, as that's not a lie.

[Old Seer]

I have a hunch that if Owens would have accused Trump of being a thug there would have been no consequences from Go Fund Me floks.

She wouldn't be wrong, as that's not a lie.

As Compared to?

[Tom62]

Candance Owens started a GoFundMe account to raise  money for an Alabama Bar that was vandalized during the riots. A co-owner of that bar called George Floyd a thug but later apologized for his remark. Candance Owens herself said that George Floyd should not be used as a martyr figure, due to his criminal history.

In a statement to justify Owen's account suspension, GoFundMe said, Owens "spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods against the black community.". This is top quality, virtue signalling, anti-conservative BS .

[Dark Lightning]

I have a hunch that if Owens would have accused Trump of being a thug there would have been no consequences from Go Fund Me floks.

She wouldn't be wrong, as that's not a lie.

As Compared to?

I don't understand your question.

[Old Seer]

I have a hunch that if Owens would have accused Trump of being a thug there would have been no consequences from Go Fund Me floks.

She wouldn't be wrong, as that's not a lie.

As Compared to?

I don't understand your question.

As compared to, who other would one want for president.

[Recusant]

The lack of details in the statement from GoFundMe is suspicious to me. It doesn't necessarily follow that their accusation is baseless. I'd have to research the claims she's made on the topic to come to a definite conclusion.

To be plain, I suspect that there may be some basis for GoFundMe's action. Candace Owens is not known for scrupulous honesty, nor for impeccable research. She's a polemicist, not an academic, and studied journalism (but didn't bother to complete her degree). In this post I'm not going to dredge up questionable things she's said in the past, but will look at something she wrote earlier today.

According to its website Black Lives Matter, Inc is NOT a charity. It is a full-fledged corporation that does NOT have any locations. Can anyone tell me then where the hundreds of millions BLM has raised goes? Can anyone tell me in what state BLM was incorporated & by who?

-- Candace Owens 1:52 PM · Jun 11, 2020

This is inaccurate. Nowhere on their website does it say that Black Lives Matter Foundation "is NOT a charity." That's because it is a nonprofit corporation. In colloquial terms it is indeed a charity. As with similar nonprofit organizations, it's registered as such with the government, and taxpayers may make tax-deductible donations to it.

The conservative/libertarian oriented Capital Research Center's Influence Watch site, which keeps track of "various influencers of public policy issues," has an entry for the Black Lives Matter Foundation. (So does the charity watch site GuideStar, but you need to create a free account there to look at their information.)

It tells us that the foundation is what is known as a 501(c)(3) organization.

In addition, it tells us that the foundation's registered address is in Canyon Country (Santa Clarita), California.

This is an example of "just asking questions." Owens knows full well that her audience will jump on this and believe that the foundation is doing something nefarious with its donations. In this tweet, she's tying in to some rubbish that InfoWars published a couple of days ago, in which it is claimed that the foundation is in fact laundering money for the Democratic National Committee (DNC), specifically donations from outside the US, which it would be illegal for the DNC to accept.

501(c)(3) organizations are required to file returns with the US Internal Revenue Service, and those returns are open to public scrutiny. Income and expenditures are detailed in such returns.

Owens is implying that there is some rather serious malfeasance on the part of the Black Lives Matter Foundation, and asking questions that I think she could easily have answered herself, if she wanted to. Of the three statements of fact that she makes in the tweet, two are false. Call me biased, but I think she's taking a dishonest approach here.

[Davin]

Candance Owens started a GoFundMe account to raise  money for an Alabama Bar that was vandalized during the riots. A co-owner of that bar called George Floyd a thug but later apologized for his remark. Candance Owens herself said that George Floyd should not be used as a martyr figure, due to his criminal history.

In a statement to justify Owen's account suspension, GoFundMe said, Owens "spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods against the black community.". This is top quality, virtue signalling, anti-conservative BS .

Why is it "conservative" to spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? And why is bad to oppose that?

[Tom62]

Candance Owens started a GoFundMe account to raise  money for an Alabama Bar that was vandalized during the riots. A co-owner of that bar called George Floyd a thug but later apologized for his remark. Candance Owens herself said that George Floyd should not be used as a martyr figure, due to his criminal history.

In a statement to justify Owen's account suspension, GoFundMe said, Owens "spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods against the black community.". This is top quality, virtue signalling, anti-conservative BS .

Why is it "conservative" to spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? And why is bad to oppose that?

Well, did she spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? So far, I haven't seen a single shred of evidence for it. Please show me some real examples that she is as evil as GoFundMe claims her to be.

[Davin]

Candance Owens started a GoFundMe account to raise  money for an Alabama Bar that was vandalized during the riots. A co-owner of that bar called George Floyd a thug but later apologized for his remark. Candance Owens herself said that George Floyd should not be used as a martyr figure, due to his criminal history.

In a statement to justify Owen's account suspension, GoFundMe said, Owens "spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods against the black community.". This is top quality, virtue signalling, anti-conservative BS .

Why is it "conservative" to spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? And why is bad to oppose that?

Well, did she spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? So far, I haven't seen a single shred of evidence for it. Please show me some real examples that she is as evil as GoFundMe claims her to be.

You claim to have listened to at least some of what she says, surely there are some shreds there.

Candice tweeted:

At their discretion, they deemed that funds raised for a conservative business constitutes “intolerance.”

That is a falsehood right there, because GoFundMe did not imply or state any such thing. They didn't ban her for raising funds for a conservative business, nor did they say that that constituted "intolerance".

Unless... conservatism by its very nature is intolerance. And again, why is it "conservative" to spread hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods? And why is bad to oppose that?

[Tom62]

If the co-owner had kept his mouth shut then nothing would have happened. I can understand that if your business gets destroyed by thugs, you'd probably not a supporter of these George Floyd "protesters". Anyway, he apologised for what he had said about Floyd.
 
The reaction of GoFundMe however wasn't justified, because they blamed Owens for spreading hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods. Which she didn't do. Now, if they'd blamed MSNBC or CNN they'd probably made a very good point.

[Old Seer]

If the co-owner had kept his mouth shut then nothing would have happened. I can understand that if your business gets destroyed by thugs, you'd probably not a supporter of these George Floyd "protesters". Anyway, he apologised for what he had said about Floyd.
 
The reaction of GoFundMe however wasn't justified, because they blamed Owens for spreading hate, discrimination, intolerance and falsehoods. Which she didn't do. Now, if they'd blamed MSNBC or CNN they'd probably made a very good point.

What this means then, is the co-owner should have censored himself before the fact, and Owens should have censored herself before the fact as not to hurt an-other's feelings , or comply to the speech requirements demanded by someone with a specific political point of view or persuasion. Where does that put freedom of speech if we all have to sensor ourselves. And, I find at this point I have an opportunity to voluntarily censor myself in this presentation so not to offend others.