The Left Has Become Psychotic, And I'm Truly Terrified
The Left Has Become Psychotic, And Its Truly Terrifying . The evidence has become overwhelming, we can see "the left" completely abandon its principles.The ACLU openly endorsing racial discrimination, refusing to defend free speech, hacker conferences getting shut down, and now we have "The Free Press" a non profit advocating AGAINST a free press.Today I saw the left wing group Free Press openly call for banning Alex Jones and I thought it was funny, the extreme irony. But after thinking about how they used to be and all the examples we have seen of the media openly defending Antifa and other fringe extremists it feels like the left has been over run by dogma and completely abandoned its principles.This is in no way a defense of the right but this is something that today truly terrifies me. They have abandoned reason and logic in favor of identitarian social justice and feminist zeal.
Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
I think some of his content is entertaining, and I know many of my friends who watch his stuff don't take him seriously.
They think it's funny when he rips his shirt off and yells, and that's the kind of stuff they watch from him.
For the most part, no one that I know really watches him anymore, and I don't know very many people who actually watched his content for serious news, but I do know he has many fans who do.
Regardless of my opinion of Alex Jones, he certainly has a right to say wacky things.
And recently, as many of you know, you probably all know, he was basically purged from the internet.
Everything was banned.
Well, the other day, Roku, which is an over-the-top system that allows people to... It's kind of like Apple TV, you know, you download apps and you can watch shows.
The InfoWars app was placed on the Roku player.
Some people noticed this, and Roku made a statement.
They said that basically, because he hasn't broken any rules today, they're not going to ban him.
However, there was a backlash on Twitter, or however it happened, I have no idea, and they decided that, you know what, they were going to ban him even though he didn't overtly break any rules.
I, for the most part, disagree with this.
I think Alex Jones may have pushed the line a little bit, but I don't... Personally, I've not seen him do things that are... You know, look, does he publish fake news?
Is that your opinion?
You disagree with him?
Sure, fine, but Vox publishes fake news.
You know, The Verge.
In some instances, you know, CNN has had to issue retractions.
So, if we believe in a free press, then you know what?
Alex Jones has a right to say what he says.
Even to an extent, saying hyperbolic things.
Like, the other day I covered a story where a woman posted something that was kind of a veiled threat against Trump.
And it wasn't even a crime.
If you can do that, then why is Alex Jones substantially worse?
Now again, I said I'm not a big fan of the guy, but I certainly believe in a right of people to express themselves on the internet.
I truly believe in a free press.
And that means the government nor private companies don't have a right to determine who is or is not a journalist.
And this is the point of today's story.
The left has gone insane or it's been taken over by complete psychopaths.
And it really does terrify me today.
As many of you know, and maybe some of you don't know, I got started, or I should say I got the most press, in what I do from Occupy Wall Street.
I went down to this protest in New York and I started live streaming these actions, filming the police and the protesters.
And people, they cherished this as some new, innovative thing.
I was praised.
I was featured in Time's Person of the Year.
I was a nominee to the Time 100 Most Influential People in the World.
They really did love what I did in trying to show an honest take where I just filmed what happened.
I didn't take sides, necessarily.
You know, when the police would beat people, I'd film and say, hey, the police are beating people.
And when the protesters would knock things over, I'd say, hey, the protesters are knocking things over.
And from this, I got the attention of some non-profits.
One of which is a group called Free Press.
This is an organization that claims to be fighting for a free press and diverse control of media.
Today, they're openly advocating for the censorship of Alex Jones.
And at first, when I saw this, I thought it was really funny.
I thought it was hilarious.
That this free press group, which has been on the left, you know, for its entire inception, was now openly advocating for censorship.
And the joke I made is it would be like if firemen literally started fires.
Yes, it's a joke referencing Fahrenheit 451.
That the free press is no longer trying to create a free press, they're trying to free you from the press.
Because they don't agree with what Alex Jones says.
And then as I started to think about it and look through the news and look at the story about Alex Jones, I started to realize I feel like the left has been completely taken over by absolute psychopaths.
And there are many other people within the left who I have known for years who are adopting the psychotic.
And I really do mean that.
It's absolutely psychotic for a group called the Free Press to advocate against a free press.
Listen.
I normally don't like being hyperbolic.
I don't like accusing people of things, but I'm just going to say it.
If you are part of a non-profit that has historically and consistently advocated for the right of diverse opinion in media, and today you are openly advocating for censorship, and your name is still the free press, You are, that's psychotic.
That is deranged.
And I don't mean that, I mean literally there is something wrong in the minds of these people who are working in a free press but advocating against it.
That, it blows my mind.
So today, I mean this is a really long intro, we're gonna look at a bunch of examples of this.
I want to talk about several instances where the left has absolutely betrayed its principles in favor of racism, xenophobia, and complete conspiratorial paranoia.
But before jumping into all that, I do need to give a quick shoutout to today's sponsor, Virtual Shield.
VirtualShield is a virtual private network.
They protect your data while you browse the web.
So if you want some privacy while you're on the internet, go to hidewithtim.com and you can get 30% off today.
That's $3.49 per month by just clicking get this exclusive deal.
After you do, they'll get you started with a free 30-day trial.
So again, If you want to protect your privacy online with a simple layer of defense, go to hidewithtim.com and sign up today.
First, we need to go back in time using the Internet Archive Wayback Machine.
We can go to September of 2012 and look at the About section of a non-profit called Free Press.
Reform Media, Transform Democracy, Save the Internet.
They say, our purpose, Free Press is building a powerful nationwide movement to change media and technology policies, promote the public interest, and strengthen democracy.
Free Press advocates for universal, universal, and affordable access to the internet, diverse media ownership, vibrant public media, and quality journalism.
Why is free press needed?
For far too long, government officials and corporations have made corrupt media policy behind closed doors.
These policies have led to runaway media consolidation, which in turn has led to corporate control over our print media, our broadcasting stations, our radio dial, and the internet.
If we want to change this dynamic, we must ensure the public has a seat at the table when media policies are made.
They go on, but it's pretty straightforward.
It's your typical left-wing position, at least it was in 2012.
That big government and big corporation will act hand in hand and oppress the average folk.
And we need to make sure everyone has access to the internet.
But what do they say today?
Today, on the Free Press About section, the exact same URL, it says, Free Press was created to give people a voice in the crucial decisions that shape our media.
So far, so good.
They now claim, we believe that positive social change Racial justice and meaningful engagement in public life require equitable access to technology, diverse and independent ownership of media platforms, and journalism that holds leaders accountable and tells people what's actually happening in their communities.
We can already see the regressive leftist and overtly racist language slipping into their about section.
They add, we believe the fight for racial justice must be at the center of transforming our media and our democracy.
But I don't understand why you need to bring this up when you are a non-profit that specifically focuses on making sure everyone has access to the internet.
Racial justice would include everyone, but we can see how times have changed.
Let's take a look at one section they have on their website called Media Control.
Powerful corporations want to decide what you're able to watch, listen to, read and share.
And runaway media consolidation among news organizations has squashed diverse local and independent voices, leaving us in the dark about important developments in our communities.
They have two sections here, media consolidation and diversity in media ownership.
But what I want to point out is where they say, Powerful corporations want to decide what you're able to watch, listen to, read, and share.
Keep that in mind.
I also want to point out they're called the Free Press and they have called for universal access to the internet.
Why that's important?
Because of this.
On January 15th, They published this.
Ban Alex Jones permanently.
Conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is so racist, homophobic, and xenophobic that Apple, Facebook, Spotify, Twitter, and YouTube banned him and his show InfoWars from their sites in 2018.
But now he's returned to Facebook with multiple new pages, and the social media giant has allowed him to resume profiting off of lies and hate.
Now, I'm not gonna read on further.
We understand how they'll frame Alex Jones, and that's fine if that's their point of view.
But isn't it very, very strange how, currently, today, they call themselves a free press, concerned that massive corporations are restricting people's access to the Internet, more specifically, restricting diversity of media.
Yet, they themselves then boast about how many massive, multinational, billion-dollar corporations have banned someone from the Internet, Because they don't like his views.
There is an absolute cognitive dissonance going on where they're simultaneously advocating for and against themselves.
The sheer irony, I tweeted, about a group called Free Press who tweets out, hateful conspiracy theorist Alex Jones is back on Facebook just a few months after the site kicked him off.
Urge Facebook to ban him permanently, quite literally.
An organization that I once donated to and once supported, who claims to advocate as a non-partisan organization fighting for your rights to connect and communicate, is actively advocating for the removal of an individual whose opinions they don't like by a massive, multinational, billion-dollar corporation.
I'll take this time to give a quick honorable mention to a Vox article where I covered this yesterday on my commentary channel, TimCastNews.
Vox is upset that Jill Abramson, former executive editor of the New York Times, didn't fact-check, or didn't have fact-checkers, and fact-checked herself.
The reason I bring this up is that it's plain to see Vox is upset about fact-checking, that the free press is upset about conspiracy theories, yet they themselves have been accused of publishing fake news time and time again.
This is why you will find an individual like myself defending the rights to a free press even when Vox News has personally lied about me.
Ezra Klein wrote a story in which he, I would say indirectly, smeared my name by aligning me with a group in which I do not agree with.
I am not calling for the censorship or banning of Vox.
That would be absurd.
I defend a right to a free press, even when it's an organization that has lied about me.
Beyond that article the free press wrote about, they actually have set up a petition for people to come to and urge the banning of Alex Jones.
Again, I have always considered Alex Jones to be wacky.
I am no fan.
But this is a new level of sheer insanity.
The free press starting a petition for a massive billion-dollar corporation to ban someone because they don't like his opinions.
We can move beyond the free press and talk about another group that I once supported, the ACLU.
I was really impressed by the ACLU defending the right of white supremacists to march in Skokie, Illinois and other places because as much as many of us, especially myself, detest these people and their views, the ACLU recognized that free speech is paramount and that we must defend it lest the most marginalized communities face the brunt of government action.
However, this story from Fox News.
Leaked anti-gun memo suggests ACLU hesitant to defend free speech if it hurts marginalized communities.
And once again a story last year from Vox, why the ACLU is adjusting its approach to free speech after Charlottesville.
The ACLU positioned itself to lead the resistance, now its deepest traditions could be at stake.
Even Vox, a left-wing publication, is acknowledging.
that the deepest traditions of the ACLU supporting free speech, even for those you detest, are at stake.
The ACLU received a massive influx of donations after they challenged Donald Trump's travel moratorium on those countries, the travel ban.
Many called it the Muslim ban.
And because the ACLU challenged this, many people on the left donated in droves.
But when the ACLU then defended Charlottesville, because they have free speech too, they lost many donors.
In response to that, the ACLU backpedaled.
And even though they still will try and play the game of saying, you know, we do support free speech for those we don't like, they did backtrack, as we saw in these two stories.
The ACLU no longer defending civil liberties, and something that strikes very close to home for me, as someone who is part Asian.
The ACLU openly advocated for discriminating against Asian people because otherwise you would benefit white people.
The most insane thing I have ever seen.
Absolute cognitive dissonance coming from another presumably left-wing organization.
It blew my mind.
How could they defend overt discrimination against one of the smaller minorities of America simply because they don't like white people?
What happened to them?
What happened to the free press and the ACLU?
They've gone insane!
And then we'll come to the last example I'm going to present today.
Something that's more current, that you've heard me rant about in complete anger, frustration, just total outrage.
Sure, call me whatever you want.
Say I'm a snowflake.
The Democratic National Committee is out as Women's March sponsor amid anti-Semitism controversy.
There are a lot of organizations, there are a lot of Democrats, even the Southern Poverty Law Center is no longer sponsoring the Women's March.
But how did we get to this point?
And where are the public statements denouncing the anti-Semitism?
We've come to a point now where one of the largest protests in history is being led by overt anti-Semites who believe in fringe anti-Jewish conspiracy theories.
How did this happen?
How did it become that the left, those on the left, the side that I've found myself on my entire life, are now marching behind anti-Semites while simultaneously denouncing the ACLU, the free press, calling for banning people from the press?
It is the most confusing thing I've ever experienced, and it seems like the left has truly been taken over by complete psychopaths.
When I was about 18, maybe younger, I remember there was a DVD being shared far and wide.
It was called Loose Change 9-11.
I worked at O'Hare Airport, so I was 18, maybe older.
And one day this guy comes in with a DVD saying, everybody, you have to watch this.
And he puts this DVD into the player, and we watched Loose Change 9-11.
This documentary went viral on its own as a physical medium, not on the internet.
And everybody was talking about it.
And this helped bolster the 9-11 Truther movement, of which I don't care for and don't agree with.
It was a fascinating documentary.
But the reason I bring it up is because many people started passing around things that said 9-11 was an inside job.
And I thought it was rather silly to imply that the President of the United States, or anyone within the government, was secretly acting in collusion with foreign entities or terrorists to attack its own people for some reason.
That was considered a fringe, wacky conspiracy theory, and many people on the left today who held those views have denounced them.
But what else are we seeing today?
The belief that Donald Trump is secretly acting in collusion with foreign entities against his own government.
It's as insane as the 9-11 truth movement.
Now look, sure, it's entirely possible there are things about 9-11 that may or may not be true.
I don't know.
Okay?
Not an expert.
I just thought it was kind of a stretch to imply the US government in any way was colluding with foreign entities, notably Saudi Arabia or certain Afghanis, in an attempt to harm their own people.
But that's literally what they're claiming now, that Trump is working with Russians or some other fringe conspiracy theory, and if there's no evidence, why are we talking about it?
Every day I see the news and it seems like things get scarier, things get much worse, and today, To go back to the first story, I saw a tweet from the Free Press, an organization I've supported, whose staffer I interviewed not even, I believe about a year ago, about certain issues on net neutrality.
An organization that today still claims to fight for universal access and diversity in media publishing, putting out a petition actively calling for the censorship of someone because they think he's racist and homophobic, or because he believes things they don't agree with, or because he's a conspiracy theorist.
How did we get to this point?
How did the left become, how did it get taken over?
And why are their people, who I used to know and stand side-by-side with at hacker conferences defending the right to free press, now openly advocating for censorship and for massive billion-dollar corporations to restrict thought?
How did we get to the point where you actually have the left, the Democrats and whoever, defending the private entities who have restricted speech, who have said they're a private business, they can do whatever they want?
How did we get to that point?
Look at me wrong.
There are certainly elements of the right that have contradicted themselves.
And the only reason I bring that up is because people are going to assume that this is some kind of conservative attack on the left.
But you know what?
Here's the reality.
I don't watch Fox News.
I've never been a conservative, and I know very few conservatives.
So the issue for me is that, as someone who has always been on the left, I am watching these Bits of evidence!
This is proof!
I don't know how you, as a rational, sane human being on the left, could look at what I've just shown you, an organization called the Free Press advocating against a free press, and think that I, in some way, am incorrect.
Now, by all means, there's gonna be people who disagree with me, and I think it's mostly tribal, but let me just say it for the 800th time before I sign off officially.
We have an organization called Free Press putting out petitions to restrict access to the press, to restrict an individual's right to expression on the internet.
That is where the left is currently standing today.
Let me know what you think in the comments below.
We'll keep the conversation going.
You can follow me on Twitter at TimCast.
Stay tuned.
New videos every day at 4 p.m.
And I'll see you later today on my second channel, youtube.com slash TimCastNews, starting at 6 p.m.
