I misspoke in my previous post. The tech companies conspired to act simultaneously when they banned Alex Jones to minimise the blow-back they’d suffer from his fans. Destroying his business/ career was a byproduct.

He/infowars broke their ToC so they acted accordingly.

How do we know that? Did they make their case in front of a neutral 3rd party? Did Jones have the oppourtunity to defend himself or appeal any decisions? No. If 20 gov’ts announced that Facebook broke their laws and its license will be suspended tomorrow Zuckerberg doesn’t just have to suck it up. He can go to court and appeal that decision. He’d even be allowed to continue operations whilst the case was pending as Uber, which is guilty of breaking numerous laws, did in London.

This bootlicking for the robber barons that dominate society is ridiculous. “It’s only oppression if it’s done by the gooburmint!” he said with Apple’s boot on his neck.

It’s interesting that this is happening to Info Wars after the tech companies conspired to destroy it and Alex Jones’ career by simultaneously banning it from all their problems at once. As I said at the time; it is very concerning that the tech companies could deny a business access to their platforms without proving their case in front of a neutral 3rd party, without offering their target a chance to defend themselves and without any oppourtunity to appeal their decision.

It was very difficult to say anything in defense of Alex Jones, even in the abstract, so they were able to set this precedent with ease.

It’s called primitive accumulation in Marxist-Leninist circles or to put it another way;

“To achieve a great leap a generation must be sacrificed” Liu Zhijin, Minister of railways

I was thinking of Russia, which was the poorest and most backwards country in Europe when the communists came to power. Within 30 years they transformed it into a military and technological superpower that defeated the Nazis and launched the first human being into space.

Soviet Union, China, Vietnam

Communist governments took power in poor countries and had to endure ‘primitive accumulation’ before they could start building a socialist economy. At best they created workers’ states where employment and basic services were guaranteed to all.

Actually near nearsightedness is due to brightness levels being much indoors rather than focal points. Even on cloudy days it’s much brighter outdoors. There’s also evidence that natural light has a calming effect on people.

How can a capitalist country have a national health service?

Whilst dissent event is catchier than mass public incident the fact that it includes petitioning through official channels makes it a meaningless number. It’s like measuring the health of a democracy by measuring voter turn out.

There are Irish republicans who refuse to swear allegiance to the king/ queen and are unable to take their seats in Westminster. This doesn’t trigger a by-election though.