JOIN our Locals community to hear the rest of the debate and questions from the audience: triggernometry.locals.com/ CHAPTERS: coming soon 👇 00:00 Trailer 01:22 Founding the Center for Countering Digital Hate 04:25 The Great Replacement Theory 07:17 The platforms pretend to care 09:27 Violative content gets rewarded 11:51 Who decides where the moral limits are? 14:00 Elon Musk invited racists onto X 15:53 Elon is suing us 17:21 The platforms try to hide their data 18:15 Debating hate speech 25:13 SPONSOR: Monetary Metals 26:01 Debate continues 29:50 Covid disinformation 34:58 Debating the lab leak 37:00 Debating vaccines 42:13 SPONSOR: Mint Mobile 43:28 Does banning work? 44:11 Andrew Tate is a piece of sh*t 46:12 Rules for controlling what’s allowed 52:59 Platforms must abide by negligence law 55:54 Should you be able to call for armed revolution online? 59:53 Trump’s Twitter ban 1:03:02 Why ban Trump and not the Ayatollah? 1:05:34 Hate speech laws 1:09:25 What’s the one thing we’re not talking about?
In under 4 min and homie called himself chattel and powdered up for another man. I’m now confident he won’t become completely unhinged by the end of the show. 😈
It’s shockingly ironic how he advocates against ‘online hate’ yet is the epitome of all the worst qualities of online trolls: condescending, sarcastic, resorting to insults, inability to understand anything not in line with his own opinions, arrogant and smug. Good lord this man has no self awareness whatsoever.
“Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” does not come above “The Right to Free Speech” in the US Constitution. “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness” isn’t even in the US Constitution, it’s in the Declaration of Independence. It isn’t a legal concept.
Shows his ignorance. He’s well educated and speaks well and to him that means he is smarter and his belief trumps everyone else’s. Self indulge piece of shit he is.
And "position" in the text has little to do with the weight or importance of the 1A. The Bill of Rights was "appended" to the end of the Constitution, after it was ratified. Does it mean it's "less" important? Are the 9th and 10th amendments less critical than the 1st and 2nd? His argument is just lazy thinking.
@@gabrielenriquemartinez your entire reply is a non sequitur. Of course an Amendment isn’t “less important”. By definition, it is part of the Constitution. The Declaration of Independence isn’t a document that defines our laws. A vague term in that document doesn’t supersede the legally binding US Constitution. That’s not how law works. I also don’t know why you put “position” in quotations, I never wrote that word. It has nothing to do with position. Those are two different documents. One is a definition of our laws and the other isn’t. Simple, or at least it should be.
Oh shock, another self appointed arbiter of acceptable speech turns out to be a predictably nauseating and biliously self righteous standard bearer of virtue and morality with a superpower for seeing the truths and sins no one else can. Straight out the cloning vat, this one
At first I was upset that they didn’t counter his BS more often, but then I realised they were just allowing him to dig his hole deeper and deeper. Brilliant.
Imran: I quit my job and took two years investigating how social media companies operate. Also Imran: I don't know how shadow banning works, if it's even real. I can smell something unpleasant.
Whats the one thing we should we talking about that we aren't? Imran: Don't know Translation: I am spouting all the talking points my overlords made for me I'm not interested in anymore
So here's what interesting: There were parts of this conversation where Imran agreed with Konstantin -and everything was fine and lovely and they had a sensible conversation. HOWEVER *The moment* they disagreed on a point, even slightly, - Imran was absolutely unable to have a grown up conversation and started straw-manning. This is my view of most people who are into "banning hate speech" - they have the critical thinking and debating skills of a petulant toddler.
I think because with activists like these, their argument, ultimately, drifts into the "because I think so' realm. And that's is opinion. And the world is full of different opinions, I think we used to call it free speech. There are flat-earthers out there, I think they're wrong but is it any of my business to go round arguing with them and telling them they're wrong? Their may be spaces online where people say bad things about Jews, bad things about Arabs, bad things about America. But they're only words. Is suppressing opinions meant to make the opinion disappear? No. It goes somewhere else, maybe on the dark Web. Nannying types like him want to make everything they don't like go away, but the world can't be managed like that. It's probably like childless female politicians, who need to treat people like children and tell them what they can and can't say.
Imran is such a bad debater and his behavior reflects poorly on his cause. I would like to see this debate repeated with someone who is less hostile and more knowledgeable.
He is a woke psychopath. And what he is literally saying is, “I want to be in charge of what people can talk about on the internet”. That is utterly frightening.
OMG, I have never watched an episode where the guest talked absolute rubbish for over a hour. People like this are the reason why we must keep free speech. Thank you for showing the world who you are.
Just another ADL/'Hope not Hate'/'Näthatsgranskaren' hack with unclear financing. Operations like these pop-up all over the place and are most likely publicly financed, either directly or through other organisations.
Just another 'Internet Stasi' hack with unclear financing. Operations like these pop-up all over the place and are most likely publicly financed, either directly or through other organisations. Additional income comes from the racket route as 'consultants'.
Just another 'Internet Stasi' hack with unclear financing. Operations like these pop-up all over the place and are most likely publicly financed, either directly or through other organisations.
oh Imran Ahmed thinks he should be in charge of what I can see, read and therefore think.. I wonder if this has anything to do with his Religiuos & or Political background... hmmm? let me think !?!
Everyone should be aware, going into this, that the term "disinformation" was coined in the year 1923... the man responsible is VERY obscure and inoffensive though, in fact, at the moment I'm struggling to remember his name. Hmmm... What was it again... Jo I think... Joseph maybe? Something Joseph. Yes, definitely Joseph. But what was his surname again? Oh, curse my wretched memory. I think he was Russian? A soviet in some capacity? Ah fuck it, I'm ignorant like Mr. Imran Ahmed, so I'll just Google it shall I? OH YES! IT WAS THAT JOSEPH. Yep. Joseph Stalin... it was JOSEPH FUCKING STALIN who coined the term "desinformatsiya" in 1923 in his time working for a KGB "black propaganda" newspaper. WAKE UP C*NTS! THESE FUCKERS WANT TO OWN YOU AND THEY WILL SUCCEED IF WE PERMIT THEM TO. I FOR ONE, WILL BE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NONE OF IT.
And uninformed. The U.S. constitution says nothing about the right of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. These are not rights as recognized in the constitution. It IS from the Declaration of Independence but that affords us nothing as U.S. citizens. I wish he'd stop talking for 30 seconds.... or much much longer.
What I find funny is Imran talks about banning self harm videos for underage girls (which is fair enough), but doesn't say anything about pro trans indoctrination which can lead to genital mutilation, sterility etc in underage girls too. He picks and chooses the content he deems is dangerous.
@@theunknownatheist3815 I don't think he's aware of it, though. You notice there were quite a few times where he seemed genuinely confused about what was Konstantin was saying. He was genuinely baffled at like "what does that have to do with this??". So deep in, that he's framed things in his mind in a completely.... bizarre kind of way. It's the whole "cult member" thing. They just don't see it.
He doesn't know what that is because he is a charlatan who created a job for himself by peddling authoritarianism lite cloaked as "do gooding". He is insufferable. These platforms have no moral obligation to amplify ur voice... if u can't stand to be offended or scared of what is on social media platforms... stay off of it.
There is absolutely zero chance I will be able to sit through this. Within 30 seconds I find this guy to be abrasive, rude, condescending and elitist. Good on you for having the patience to endure thing conversation.
"barry down the pub" is not allowed a voice, but if you go to the largest private day school for boys in the United Kingdom you can fail at medicine, go work in the city (when you want a bit of money) get a job in an NGO, work for Governement and then build a start up talking shite.... poor Barry, he should have had parents like Ahmeds.. I wonder what they are like? its new labour guys & 2 tier Kier all the way to tyranny
The most dangerous people in the world are the ones that think everyone else is stupid & assume they know best. The arrogance of this guest is (forgive me) pure cringe 😂
The fact that Imran is an "expert" on this topic but has no knowledge of what shadow banning is, and is blissfully unaware that gender-critical voices have been silenced en-masse on social media, says it all.
Since he feels free to read minds, I'm going to do the same. I think he knows full-well what it is and how it's used, but it was expedient to pretend he doesn't know.
"I'm a Muslim myself" And therein lies the reason you come across as disingenuous, we know that 'hate speech' will be expanded to include anything 'blasphemous'.
"hatred against Jews, blacks, LGBT" Every single time. Just say you care about protecting everyone who isn't straight white and male, it's obvious that's what you mean.
Nationalism and democracy are inextricably linked. Freedom does not last long in a multi-ethnic/multicultural empire. Immigrants/slaves/proletariat same old shit.
@@Wolf-zp5iw but we're "far-right fascists" for speaking out against tyranny and standing for objective truth and freedom. The left, per their own definition, are literally fascists; Imran is literally a fascist.
@@user-zc4yd9ss7h Good point. Technically, there's no record of him actually saying "I would jail each and every internet commenter if I could". I guess we can only conclude that he cares deeply about protecting individual liberty. And that he's intimately aware of the danger of governments using hate speech laws to silence and criminalize us for sharing opinions that disagree with whatever narrative they're trying to impose. Until there's actual evidence that his intention is to literally put us all in jail, I really don't see any basis for that comment. Hyperbolic rhetorical devices??? Hypotheticals?? Sarcasm??? What???? I have no idea what any of that means.
There is no such thing as hate speech only speech I hate. Giving anyone the power to decide what speech is unacceptable is more power than anyone or any group of people should have in any society.
Imran’s blatant use of straw-man arguments (misrepresenting what you say and attacking you based on their own distortion) is repulsive. It’s a tactic very common among narcissists.
Don't you think it's a cognitive distortion to believe you're an expert in diagnosing personality disorders? Which is a current cultural contagion by the way. That's where your own argument became very weak and flawed. Also you used a false diagnosing label as a personal attack. Stick to the facts
"Weak men hide in the shadows, silencing others because they lack the strength to stand in the light and fight their own battles." Everything about Imran Ahmed screams weak man!
I don’t believe his equal treatment across the board even a little. He would ban anything and everything he didn’t agree with over his own beliefs in a New York minute.
He comes across as someone who thinks the planets revolve around him and peasants should grovel at his feet while listening to his wisdom. Nauseating x 10.
He probably created this 'NGO' to appoint himself as 'CEO' and have a job. Besides labour-related positions, nobody would give this dude a job. No chance.
Yeah the 200,000 likely included all those who died 'with' coevidd as they falsely skewed the figure by listing deaths from coevidd to include anyone who tested positive who died. So that figure is grossly misleading. It's funny how his organisation didn't detect the misinformation Imran himself it touting.
I can say for sure that Konstantin is *not* the one being a dickhead. Though someone was being one. This guy just screams that he is not debating in good faith in his voice and mannerisms.
Everyone should be aware, going into this, that the term "disinformation" was coined in the year 1923... the man responsible is VERY obscure and inoffensive though, in fact, at the moment I'm struggling to remember his name. Hmmm... What was it again... Jo I think... Joseph maybe? Something Joseph. Yes, definitely Joseph. But what was his surname again? Oh, curse my wretched memory. I think he was Russian? A soviet in some capacity? Ah fuck it, I'm ignorant like Mr. Imran Ahmed, so I'll just Google it shall I? OH YES! IT WAS THAT JOSEPH. Yep. Joseph Stalin... it was JOSEPH FUCKING STALIN who coined the term "desinformatsiya" in 1923 in his time working for a KGB "black propaganda" newspaper. WAKE UP C*NTS! THESE FUCKERS WANT TO OWN YOU AND THEY WILL SUCCEED IF WE PERMIT THEM TO. I FOR ONE, WILL BE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NONE OF IT.
This guy clearly thinks himself always the smartest guy in the room and is deeply in love with the sound of his own words. It was amusing to hear him confuse Thomas Jefferson’s Declaration of independence (life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness) with the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment protecting free speech. The Declaration is America’s most treasured philosophical document but it has no legal standing whatsoever. The Constitution is the legal foundation of our country and its authors quite deliberately chose freedom of speech and religion over any others while hammering it out. Imran is glib and clever but most unwise.
@@bimfredgood or bad? Hitler and Stalin definitely achieved more than you have, but I would probably prefer you to them, and that's without knowing you.
I absolutely disagree with Imran about children taking the vaccine because if everyone else was vaccinated, how could the children be of threat? Great show boys 😊
Ahmed was fascinating to watch: how he moved in his seat, adjusted his jacket, used his hands and so on. I enjoyed how he would support his head with his finger-tips and change his voice when talking about the online plebs and conspiracy theorists. My impression was: the guy is and ego-maniac. He's articulate and smart enough to hide and 'talk-around' his intolerance. The most telling moment was his different stance on cancelling Icke and Trump and KK pulled him up on "arguing both ways in one conversation". It was a huge inconsistency - and quite revealing. I'm sure he's lovely to work for.
Trig people, your guest scared me… he’s so in denial he could be highly dangerous. When you can propose a lie as a truth without even flinching then you’re in dangerous territory. A truly worrying individual. Self belief as a delusion.
I thought it was brilliant the way they split the screen up at some points when KK was talking so you could see how IA was reacting to what he was saying.
The hubris of this guy is staggering. He's truly in favour of hate speech laws because he believes the State is so good and gracious that "they'll only use it against the 'bad people', and I'm not a bad person so it doesn't effect me!" Again, the hubris & short-sightedness is staggering.
He is the worst type of person in the world. He doesn't come out and just state his view, which is that he doesn't believe in free speech. Instead, he couches it in virtuous language as though he is the "good guy." Unfortunately, many people fall for this. People tend to think of tyrants throughout history as cartoonist supervillains, but the reality is that they ALL couched their arguments in the language of virtue. His beliefs are the gas that will someday fuel the fire of tyranny if he is allowed to have his way.
What makes it even worse than that is the fact that he works in government, he KNOWS government. He knows how unethical these people are, Yet he's choosing to be blind....
That's not true. He thinks he's better than you and he should be in charge, telling people what they can and cannot say. In fact, that actually is is job. He's not honest and stupid. He is evil.
This guys made me think of this saying “Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times.”
I don't know the context of the original 'dickhead' quote, because they don't include that part of the video in the final edit. Possibly this was because it was part of the paid content at the end. It's impossible to know if he was misrepresented here because we don't have the full context. I get that KK and FF like all YTers have to deal with the algorithms and need to draw people into their content, but I hope this was just something overlooked rather than a cavalier attempt to gain clicks at Imran's expense.
The claim that Elon Musk is in it for the money has been categorically DISPROVEN by his willingness to give up ad money, and possibly the success overall of the site, for free speech. He stood up to censorship at a major monetary loss.
That was such a ridiculous claim. Elon Musk spends $44 billion to buy a social media company, and Imran Ahmed thinks Musk's aim is to make a huge profit by selling adverts? I'm not discounting the idea of Musk seeking other benefits, but discussing that might have led on to the topic of what/whose influences he's trying to counter.
His mannerisms are so performative. He oozes snake oil salesman vibes, partly hidden with politics-trained conversation style and faux-empathy. He makes my skin crawl. Not a guy to be trusted.
He makes some very valid points but I agree with the faux-empathy and deflection of his true bias by over emphasising anti-semitism. Very odd how he teetered on the call for 'armed revolution' which I believe was Constantin's pseudonim for HAMAS!
Agreed! Snake oil salesman vibes. I think everyone can see straight through him. I would bet he thinks he’s hot shit though and that he manages to pull the wool over everyone’s eyes.
You wouldn’t want this guy deciding what you’re having for lunch let alone having a say on what is or isn’t disinformation. Absolutely shocking that a guy like this has managed to make a career and be in positions of influence. Gives us some insight as to why the country has declined as it has.
Seems like a pretty standard political figure to me. That’s why the public needs to be more involved in the legislative process. Guys like this craft the policy that turns into law.
@@medicineforthesoul3225 sadly you are right, he is the typical guy that is working in political offices or government quangos etc. His lack of critical thinking is unbelievable for someone who has held the positions and influence that he has. The bit when he was talking about how he doesn’t care if c-19 info was censored as “Barry” from down the pub’s opinion doesn’t matter just shows his contempt for opposing views to his own. He doesn’t care about the truth or right and wrong if it doesn’t align with his existing ways of thinking. All throughout the interview he wasn’t really listening to their points, he was just waiting for his next chance to speak.
LOL....and for a moment I thought you were heading this way..."...what you're having for lunch let alone being his wife and him deciding your lunch indefinitely"
So true. I hate it when people tell me what to eat for lunch. Dinner too, but that's a whole other story that I'll share another day, if I don't get cancelled first or sick of eating the same lunch every bloody day.
He agrees with checks and balances....but only within a system set up around everything he agrees with ....there's no need for checks and balances in a system like that. That's like saying I'll be a transparent Authoritarian.
That doesn't make sense. Speech which incites hatred is hate speech. It's as simple as that. It's not necessary for such speech to be hated either, because people may agree with the hatred being propagated. It's just that we need to be nuanced about differentiating hate speech designed to damage vs. genuine concerns regarding particular people or groups.
Dude lost me especially when he said he didn't care if the COVID virus came from a lab in China, he gets no points for that, and frankly he's just talking nonsense now.
He's the type of person who has never been punched in the face and has not ever punched anyone in the face. He needs those experiences it will help him with his lack of humility.
You know that particular meme "Radical muslim: "Follow Allah or I'll kill you", Modern muslim: "Follow Allah or he'll kill you" (by pointing finger at radical muslim"? Well, he's the modern one...
the synopsis is: "barry down the pub" is not allowed a voice, but if you go to the largest private day school for boys in the United Kingdom you can fail at medicine, go and work in the city (when you want a bit of money) get a job in an NGO or 2, work for Governement and then build a start up talking shite.... poor Barry, he should have had parents like Ahmeds.. I wonder what they are like? hard core Northern working class people with integrity, ethics and strong convictions of collective good no doubt. its got to be new labour guys & 2 tier Kier all the way to tyranny
@@jessyhart6638the problem is people don’t actually know what hanlons razor actually is. “Reasonably” is the operative word, you only attribute to incompetence if it would be a reasonable explanation. We are so far beyond that being a reasonable explanation for any of this.
Honestly, it's important to hear the arguments of the enemy. That way we know more of the landscape and can formulate strategy effectively. I'm glad the boys had this discussion.
My question is always, what happens when the opposing party takes control and deems your speech as hateful or misinformation? Will you feel the same about the topic then?
The point of hate speech is to eliminate the opposing party so that the exact situation you are describing never arises. Prosecute your opposition for mean words by positioning yourself as a victim, on the defense; eliminate entire swaths of permissible subjects, concerns, ideas. You literally rip the ground from under them. It's a pathway to delegitimizing opposing views. There is no opposing party in the situation you describe because opposition is illegal.
The leftists will simply not allow an opposing party to take power, now will they? Look at the constant attacks on Trump...he even "fell down" at that rally of his due to a "loud noise". One inch away from getting what they wanted. They will get it by another means either way. Kamala Harris is about to receive more votes than any candidate in history, without even debating, just like senile old Biden in 2020. All very believable, huh? lol
When does being this mendacious and obnoxious become hateful. This dickhead to use his vernacular should censor his own gob by his own sanctimonious judgemental standards.
He quoted numbers from the first days after the change ... I assume lots of people were just testing it out, see if it would go thru ... excellent thought on them being black people, hadn't thought of that.
The problem has always been, who defines extremism, who defines misinformation, and who defines 'hate'. It's always people in power, it's always to their benefit, and that's an ability that authoritarian governments salivate over, and which citizens are very wise to keep out of the hands of those in power.
“I had blond hair” “I studied medicine” “I worked in banking” “I don’t care” “I think it’s bollocks” I, I, I, I: only someone this arrogant could think it is their job or indeed that they should even have the right, to decide what other people should hear.
@@reuben8856 you're wrong in the sense that I did watch it, you're right in the sense that he wasn't that bad hahha He did make a few retarded assertions, but overall what he said wasn't that bad. I feel what he said is a bit f a facade of what he believes, because his calls to action really don't match with what he's saying.
The way his eyes lit up when he said how much money they'd raised by suing Elon Musk was very telling. Every Crusade in history has had 💰💵💰💵💰 at the heart!
What a narcissist! 911 occurred the day before his 23rd birthday and so he goes on to say,” I went to Cambridge and studied politics and went on to work in politics for 10 years so that I could try and make sure that it didn’t happen again.” He’s sooo insufferable. And I’m not sure if they’re doing it consciously but Francis and Konstantin are speaking only briefly but articulately and then are giving Mr Windbag all the time that he needs to show us all who he is and what he stands for. A tissue paper castle built on quicksand!
Everyone should be aware, going into this, that the term "disinformation" was coined in the year 1923... the man responsible is VERY obscure and inoffensive though, in fact, at the moment I'm struggling to remember his name. Hmmm... What was it again... Jo I think... Joseph maybe? Something Joseph. Yes, definitely Joseph. But what was his surname again? Oh, curse my wretched memory. I think he was Russian? A soviet in some capacity? Ah fuck it, I'm ignorant like Mr. Imran Ahmed, so I'll just Google it shall I? OH YES! IT WAS THAT JOSEPH. Yep. Joseph Stalin... it was JOSEPH FUCKING STALIN who coined the term "desinformatsiya" in 1923 in his time working for a KGB "black propaganda" newspaper. WAKE UP C*NTS! THESE FUCKERS WANT TO OWN YOU AND THEY WILL SUCCEED IF WE PERMIT THEM TO. I FOR ONE, WILL BE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NONE OF IT.
I really hope he does but, people like him are too stupid to understand, that's the problem, there is a glut of idiots thinking they are smart, and idiots they are...
The comments will merely confirm his worldview. He is a dangerous man, but would be much more so if he was actually intelligent. What an embarrassing fool.
oh Imran Ahmed thinks he should be in charge of what I can see, read and therefore think.. I wonder if this has anything to do with his Religiuos & or Political background... hmmm? let me think !?!
No, id disagree in that someone calling for the death or Injury if others *does* fall under that even under free speech laws. I just don't remember how they were applied.
@@ilyeshmusic for a start he runs an organisation trying to influence worldwide policy on hate, yet has zero awareness of the most influential hate legislation brought in in the last few years, in Scotland. That and his complete reliance on the butterfly effect for pretty much every argument. He's a totalitarian.
I love how Konstantin upholds his boundaries as soon as this guest starts spewing his distortions. Great modeling of how it's done calmly, clearly and firmly.
No he wasn't at all. He was saying there was a rise in anti semitism, an observation. As for being triggered, wouldnt you be being condescended to by someone this insufferable, he knows everything and nothing. This is the face of what controls the construction of those algorithms he hates. He is just saying I WANT THE POWER, not you little person. @@royboy4571
@@mathewseddon8825 MMM,how original. As I was saying, KK, has his good moments, but I get the vibe, that he likes to be the smartest in the room, and when he gets called out, becomes very scratchy.
If you ever get into an argument with this as the topic, just say: Is saying "I hate *put the name of any person*" hate speech? If yes (if you think hate speech actually is a thing, than the answer should be yes) that means you can't say you hate the priest who molested you, or your ex who scammed you for all your savings and you cant say you hate even the most evil person. Or are you allowed to hate some people, but others not so much? Or can you hate a specific priest, but not the Catholic church? Or should it just be based on feelings? If you ever feel offended above 7 on a 1-10 scale, than the other part has comitted a crime... And if saying "I hate....) isnt hate speech, why on earth call it hate speech...
It will be defined by "what a reasonable person would consider hate speech." Which of course means anyone who disagrees with the person in power, since the whole reason you disagree with someone is that you think their opinion isn't reasonable.
any hatespeech laws are only there to take away your voice bit by bit. It has nothing to do with so called hatespeech. That's just an excuse. They don't care. /Swede
It's wild. Every time an instance of censorship is brought up that had real world, negative consequences- this guy just says "I'm not talking about that!" Has he seriously never considered the consequences of his own activism?
The guy arguing for more stringent policing of hate speech and misinformation continuously misrepresents Konstantin’s speech to make him appear hateful. Interesting.
Jordan Peterson once said in an interview while talking about who decides what is hate speech on social media (paraphrasing) “the people you would least want to”.
@@juanzulu1318Its quite funny that despite the beliefs and intentions you mistakenly accuse me of (you know nothing about me mighty keyboard warrior), you never actually disagreed with my comment on JP. The truth is details matter and context matters. JP would have at one time been all over it once upon a time. I presume there is no point arguing with you tho cos you clearly missed both
The guy chatted away for almost 20 mins basically uninterrupted, then as soon as Konstantin said his first completely fair and reasonable point, the guy started getting touchy and misrepresenting what had been said immediately. Folks like this never get any push back when everyone the interact with in life has the same viewpoint. It just goes to show how people like this are in such a bubble, only conversing with others who agree and parrot the same things. He is not used to and unable to hear any push back, and its such an alien concept to hm that there are other viewpoint than his own, and the guy can't handle it.
According to Stephen Kotkin an expert on Soviet Russia and Stalin "it turns out that the Communists In Soviet Russia behind closed doors were Communists".
Did this guys really just suggest that “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” is part of the First Amendment? That’s in the Declaration of Independence 🤦♂️
Sadly they didn't get into the real issue regarding this topic: His categories of "hate", "misinformation" and so on are not rooted in any solid foundation. It's just his opinions, and that's it.
@@icarusjumped2719 I mean historically, i would say yes, to the same degree.. Maybe even worse in some cases (witch hunt, catholic church, burning of alexandria, descimation of ancient cultures and artefacts, colonialism, the list goes on). it's the same mentality. nothing much has changed on that front. all that's happened is we've gotten more technologically and intellctually developed. But as far as social, emotional, and spiritual? Not a lot has changed.
@Corteum no, it's not. You are equating Christianity to Islam, and they operate VERY differently. On a fundamental level. Were there Christian pearl clutcher's back in the day? Sure. But they were doing it to try to protect kids from what they saw as dangerous violent exposure from things like video games. Islam, seeks to control EVERYTHING you say so that you cannot criticise it, or anything it does. It is a totalitarian ideology. THAT is the difference. Islam does not equal Christianity. In ANY arena.
This guy is one of the most disingenuous and insufferable people I’ve ever seen, but I’m gonna sit through this and suffer because I feel like I need to
He's just simply lying in an "intelligent" way. He knows he can pull the wool over the eyes of x amount of people. That's all that matters. He's an operator of disinformation on behalf of the elite. Not to be underestimated.
So he wants companies liable for lying to people harming them and possibly killing them? What about the pharmaceutical companies?! They’re not liable, they can’t be sued. So is it gonna go after them? I think he needs to start there. Oh That’s right, he doesn’t wanna see that data or that correct information. He’s too busy wanting it censored. What this guy actually wants to do, is clogged up the courts in every country! ? Instead of calling out for his nonsense?
Everyone should be aware, going into this, that the term "disinformation" was coined in the year 1923... the man responsible is VERY obscure and inoffensive though, in fact, at the moment I'm struggling to remember his name. Hmmm... What was it again... Jo I think... Joseph maybe? Something Joseph. Yes, definitely Joseph. But what was his surname again? Oh, curse my wretched memory. I think he was Russian? A soviet in some capacity? Ah fuck it, I'm ignorant like Mr. Imran Ahmed, so I'll just Google it shall I? OH YES! IT WAS THAT JOSEPH. Yep. Joseph Stalin... it was JOSEPH FUCKING STALIN who coined the term "desinformatsiya" in 1923 in his time working for a KGB "black propaganda" newspaper. WAKE UP C*NTS! THESE FUCKERS WANT TO OWN YOU AND THEY WILL SUCCEED IF WE PERMIT THEM TO. I FOR ONE, WILL BE HAVING ABSOLUTELY NONE OF IT.
I agree with Imran on one thing: it’s ok to censor government speech. He just thinks it should be Trump, and I think it should be everyone in government.
"When I am weaker than you I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles."
