Censorship, narrative control and propaganda

Michael Moriarity wrote:

Well, Krop, I don't see any inconsistency between my post and that of your brother. We both agree that worries about censorship of the internet because of C-10 are not justified. I personally differ from many artists in that I philosphically disapprove of the idea of intellectual property, although I understand and sympathize with the fact that this is their only source of remuneration under the current, corrupt system.

It supplements rather than supplants.

Here is a great video explaining how our censorship is happening in real time. I agree with this comment from the video. "The part where America had to also go over to Weibo in order to argue with someone because they have them censored on Twitter is hilarious !"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_HZlG8jTdU

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a great video explaining how our censorship is happening in real time. I agree with this comment from the video. "The part where America had to also go over to Weibo in order to argue with someone because they have them censored on Twitter is hilarious !"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_HZlG8jTdU

Thanks for the link, krop. The vlogger, Daniel Dumbrill, seems to be a pretty interesting person. British father, south american mother, born in UK, raised in Canada, worked for Rogers here, then moved to China and started a very successful micro-brewery. He seems very intelligent and well informed, and I will probably watch more of his videos.

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Here is a great video explaining how our censorship is happening in real time. I agree with this comment from the video. "The part where America had to also go over to Weibo in order to argue with someone because they have them censored on Twitter is hilarious !"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_HZlG8jTdU

That was a great video. I watched the whole thing regular speed. 

Meanwhile here in Canada:

Quote:

arly this morning, at 1:30 am EST, the House of Commons voted to pass controversial Bill C-10: An Act to amend the Broadcasting Act. After several weeks of the government imposing extreme restrictions to debate and due process for the Bill, C-10 will now move on to the Senate for consideration, where concerned Canadians hope it will finally be given the attention, debate, and scrutiny it was denied by the House of Commons. 

Bill C-10 poses a significant threat to the open Internet, and introduces sweeping new powers for the Canadian Radio-television Telecommunications Commission (CRTC). Yet despite overwhelming criticism from Internet experts, digital creators and Internet users across the country, the government has outright dismissed engaging with its critics, refused to acknowledge the substantive implications of the Bill, and in some cases resorted to outright lies about its contents and potential ramifications. 

“This is an abomination for our democracy – the government’s handling of Bill C-10 has been a complete disaster from start to finish,” said OpenMedia Campaigns Director Matt Hatfield. “The government was so desperate to pass Bill C-10, they’ve thrown out our democratic processes along the way. Not only did they refuse to do an open public consultation; but even the basic norms of how any legislation should be thoroughly debated, amended, and voted on, were thrown out the window. Minister Guilbeault even stooped to openly lying about the substance of the Bill and its implications, attempting to gaslight critics in their genuine concern. It’s truly embarrassing. ”

More troubling than the passage of the bill was that the NDP essentially rolled over and handed the Liberals dictatorial powers, when before we could always count on them to defend a free and open internet. Even more ironic is, as much damage as Harper did to democracy while he was in power, Parliament did a better job holding him in check when he had a majority than they have with Trudeau throughout his minority time.

Yet another good reason to vote against the NDP in the next federal election. It would not matter if they were replaced by the Liberals, as they have handed the Liberals a de facto majority without having anything to show for it. The fewer NDP MPs left standing after the next election the better.

Pondering wrote:

Perfect should not be the enemy of good. Until such time as Lascaris takes power asuming it happens Singh is the best we've got. Electing more Conservatives or Liberals would not be an improvement. At least the NDP has some progressive MPs.

Singh flaked out in calling for martial law over the covid pandemic. He and his MPs also think that I am racist because I don't like lockdowns or mask mandates, so the NDP is simply not an acceptable option to me in the next federal elections. In terms of defending basic human rights and civil liberties, the Conservatives recently have been less reprehensible on that issue than the NDP, as their Health Critic Michelle Rempel-Garner was all over the government over the problems with the hotel quarantine fiasco earlier this year. Besides, by and large the whole of Parliament has rolled over for Trudeau anyways (validated by Atwin's defection from the Greens to that party) so changing the current composition of MPs among the parties currently represented won't change a thing. Additionally, if my experience contacting politicians is any indication (and I'm already on a first-name basis with a few elected representatives across many levels), most MPs have simply stopped responding to communications from average, every-day constituents and are only communicating with the political cliques that represent their power base anyways. They are all merely party puppets at this point, virtue-signalling about whatever their base tells them is imoprtant knowing full well no action will be taken on that file. They are not doing the jobs we sent them to do, and they all deserve to be voted out in the next election.

Depends on your priorities. Mine are climate change first and income inequality second. Lascaris is the only person I have any faith in being able to turn things around. Failing that a party that does fight for some help for people living in poverty, that promotes basic income, that wants to expand medicare and introduce pharmacare, beats the Liberals and Conservatives without a doubt. 

Green is out of the question for me as long as Paul is their leader. 

NDPP wrote:

Expect to see more of this, as a new 'friendly fascism' styled as a liberal-left 'progressive' consensus, seeks to silence critical protest and divergent views. Resist don't collaborate.

Sounds like someone who has been watching too much Fox News.