Utilitarian morality requires that I turn my face away from the people I propose to sell out: Monica Lewinsky, Tara Reade. This is agonizingly hard for me to do. Pretending not to believe the complainants — which is what is taking place with Ms. Reade — or that they’re loose nobodies, which is what much of the media did to Ms. Lewinsky, is just an escape from the hard work of moral analysis.
And it adds to the harm. How is feminism advanced by casting a reasonably credible complainant as a liar? Better to just own up to what you are doing: sacrificing Ms. Reade for the good of the many.
...
Today, the Trump-Pence ticket looks even worse. Mr. Trump, credibly accused of rape [wrong] and a confessed grabber of women’s genitalia [with consent], and Mr. Pence, who will not dine alone with a woman other than his wife [possibly the opposite of rape] (whom he calls “Mother”), combine both Mr. Starr’s and Mr. Clinton’s belief systems [dozens of trips to Epstein's Island, and a painting of him in Monica's dress], offering voters in one ticket the full spectrum of misogyny. Mr. Biden, that relic of the good-old-boy Senate years, seems positively benign by comparison.
I will remind you that Tara Read accused, and has been accusing, Joe Biden of digitally raping her with force for several decades. Not just "I regret us fooling around", but him being a creep (impossibru); her rejecting his advances; then him grabbing her arm, forcing her against a wall, shoving his fingers inside of her, and telling her that she liked it. So, you know, actual rape. She made an initial police report and everything. The author believes Tara Read was raped; but did you know that Pence doesn't have sex with other women? That's even worse.
This is also a reminder that Utilitarianism is evil, and barely a valid ethical framework.
They seem to have ignored the point that one is a serial hair-smelling creep since his whole life, and the other one nobody had said a bad word about until his confirmation. Hell, Kavanaugh is still non-confrontational from what I can tell, compared to the others.
I agree with the lefties that you have to assess plausibility, though. Neither believing all women nor disbelieving them all is the correct attitude. And people are welcome to believe whatever they want, but if they keep harping on it I'm going to call them retards. It's not the end of the world.
I would have respect for them too, I'd just respectfully ask them to improve the UI, discoverability on that platform without ALREADY knowing the creator (like from YouTube) is awful on there.
For now, Rumble will remain far more niche - it does not have the resources to be competitive with Youtube even in terms of UI, etc. But it will keep improving as it grows.
Considering every new YouTube UI enhancement has been user hostile for a while (downvotes, search, order by age, playlists), the lack of "enhancement" for Rumble can only be seen as a good thing.
Like I said in the other thread, Rumble has no raison d'etre if they censor just as much as YouTube. I think in this particular case, the right thing to do is aligned with their monetary interest.
I can't remember if this is true of Rumble, but some of the alternatives' clients still lack the usability and features of YouTube. That's ok as long as there's some reason to be on Rumble.
I imagine they're trying to get an angle on Jimmy Dore as well. But TYT took their best shot and he seemed to laugh it off. Even more amusing is that Kasparian seems to be getting more red pilled by the day.
YouTube suspended Brand’s ability to earn money on its platform on Tuesday but Rumble has rejected calls to do the same. On Friday, Brand said the moves to block him from receiving advertising revenue for his videos on social media platforms have occurred “in the context of the online safety bill”.
Huh.
The Times estimates that Brand earns £27,000 a month from his Rumble channel and £1m a year from YouTube before ads were suspended. His literary agent, tour promoter and book publisher have also dropped him.
It's theft, pure and simple.
The Times writes:
Rumble, a Florida-based company, prides itself on hosting those with extreme views who have been excluded from “mainstream” platforms.
It seems that these fake media companies did not contact the advertisers, but that this was done by an organization called 'The News Movement'. It barely has an online footprint. It has 31,000 followers on Instagram, a similar number of Youtube subscribers, and barely any views at all. Seems like an astroturfing operation.
And it turns out that, yes, these pieces of shit have been contacting advertisers to threaten them:
Massive brands including @burgerking, @asos, London’s @barbicancentre and @hellofresh have pulled advertising from Russell Brand’s Rumble channel, The News Movement can reveal.
Three of the companies have removed their ads from Rumble altogether after The News Movement found that they were appearing alongside Brand’s videos.
Basically, everything else they're posting is BS - from Erdogan complaining about LGBTP, a girl being suspended for her hair, and some idiot football player complaining about different teams by gender.
It's not the "News Movement" - it was the UK Government that did it. This is not "collusion", this is illegal government censorship by an out of control totalitarian government.
Look, If Brand is tried and convicted THEN you can deperson him - but all we have now is cackling hen gossip and accusations that would make the witches of the Crucible blush.
These evil regimes need to be overturned and our rights and liberties restored.
Look, If Brand is tried and convicted THEN you can deperson him
I mean if you're talking about totalitarian governments, historically they've not been shy of kangaroo courts and show trials. So even them it probably isn't universally justifiable.
Look, If Brand is tried and convicted THEN you can deperson him
Has he even been accused of anything that he could be convicted of? All I've heard so far is "sexual misconduct" (aka bullshit) and "didn't use a condom in otherwise consensual sex." Oh, and one time he had a "look." Can't forget about that damning accusation.
Because of the UK's laws on sex, they might be able to convince someone that sex with deception was rape, but that definition would be retroactively applied since his sexual activity predated the new definition of rape. That being said, it's not possible to get more evidence, so that's all that there's ever going to be at this point.
They couldn't convict him even if he actually did rape someone because there's no evidence left.
I don't think it's consensual if you agree on sex with a condom and your guy then takes it off.
Now I don't got a vagina, but I'll make the assumption you can probably tell when one is on versus off as it plunges into your slophole.
Which leaves the only two options of you called him out on this, during which he continued and its just regular rape, or you didn't, meaning you let him violate your "consent" silently and I have no respect or sympathy for you.
Basically, the condom thing means nothing because its still either just fucking rape or he didn't know it was nonconsensual. Same as always.
It was Dinenage that contacted the media platforms, this is some random outfit contacting Rumble advertisers on the heels of that, in a transparent attempt to fit them up for their own allegations that they support rape.
YouTube really should be liable for that. They made an editorial choice when they demonitized the channel, they acted in the role of publisher, not platform. So to monetize a demonetized channel, they are acknowledging the content as being unfit for publishing, but profiting off of publishing it.
It's the same group of mostly transgender communists who have been using the same terrorist tactics against whoever they're pointed towards for decades. It'll never stop until there's a law that means people like Nandini Jammi are isolated in prison for the rest of their lives that gets harshly enforced.
Post 2015 we've all been stuck in: The Crucible MMO. Where a cadre of little girls run the world with allegations and whisper networks. You can't even pull a John Proctor sacrifice to break the collective stranglehold, because corporate media will twist or hide the moment.
They have been intentionally designed to act as a government psy-op for decades now; they control the entirety of our main communication, and they are powerful enough to make American Express and CocaCola bend the fucking knee. This is one of the major sources of the oligarchy.
The thing One of the things I hate about this shit is, it's hard to tell if these people are malicious, or retarded malicious and retarded.
Cancel culture is just the norm now, sadly. Free speech isn't. Is this companies just doing what's expected of them, companies being insufferable woke bastards, or some combination. Regardless, fuck 'em.
Also, I called this. Everyone's in on it, this is coming from NGOs and governments, as well as private (bad) actors. Russell Brand has been on the list for now, and they've finally sent the first wave of actual goons after poking at him with a stick for a while.
Here's (one of) the stupid fucking things. These companies are under no obligation to kick anyone off (except under rare circumstances where someone is actually barred by a court from accessing the internet, which I think is almost always bullshit anyway, unless they're actually in prison at the time) of their platforms. Russell Brand could actually be convicted of rape and sent to jail (he won't be), and Rumble could still say..."Well, his content isn't breaking any rules on our site.
Off-site rules are evil. Again, outside of specific circumstances. If I was a company, and someone was using their same persona on another platform, and he was actively advocating for people to go around raping people, or something, yeah, I can understand wanting to distance myself from that person. Other than that, if you're not breaking rules on my hypothetical site, I don't care. Convicts still have rights...much less a celebrity being accused by the media smear campaigns about shit that happened decades ago.
TL;DR: Companies pulling ads over this are prime bitches, and either hate or don't understand freedom and our country.
Eh, the phrase "useful idiots" get's thrown around a lot. And we know how invasive these pests are. Not trying to simp for companies, but point is, not all of them are necessarily actively woke. Some of it could be essentially HR nonsense, and not coming from the very top. Doesn't absolve them and, like I said, regardless of their reasons, their lack of standing up for basic American freedoms is to absolutely be condemned.
So, yes, the corporations deserve blame, absolutely. But I don't think they're the final ones pulling the strings. They're dancing to Blackrock/Vanguard/ESG/DIE/etc.'s tunes, and those organizations are dancing to tunes of even more shadowy players.
Again, not simping for them or anything, but they're playing within the current system, is my point. Which is what makes it so frustrating; the current system incentivizes (and incentives at the highest level of the corporate world are essentially compulsions) cancerous and anti-American actions.
So their marketing department is still left infested that they can't see the best thing to do is shut up and hunker down in a situation like this.
They've now just raised their heads above the parapet doing this so if Russell Brand's video on Monday is well received and shifts the narrative from rape allegations to governmental censorship, they're not in a good position and are ALL services that can easily be boycotted like budweiser.
Rumble should have a policy to give channels a realtime, detailed breakdown of advertisers and amounts.
Then Russel Brand can weaponize this by singling out advertisers that left and instructing his audience to boycott them - either one at a time or a big list. Even if it's a small channel of like 10k viewers, let the creator say "looks like Burger King doesn't want your money, guys".
Flip the script so advertisers fear removing their money in a witchhunt like this. As it is we don't know who to boycott. The News Movement - the enemy - isn't a trusted source for anything.
While I still have the ability to within the law, I bought another Roku device to join the one I won in a competition a couple of years ago, downloaded the Rumble app onto it (they don't support Google TV/casting) and can now view content on TV. Consider this my middle finger to the cancel culture brigade.
I'm not surprised that Burger Fag King pulled their ads. I'm surprised that they were advertising on Rumble in the first place. Remember, their marketing has been woke for a long time. They were the inspiration for the "burgers?" meme.
Meanwhile Cardi B admitted drugging men to steal cash.
Cardi B makes money from her music, which is available to buy and stream on platforms like iTunes, Apple Music, and Spotify. She also earns money from endorsements and sponsorships through companies like Pepsi, Reebok, and Steve Madden
If you let the UK government control what journalists we are allowed to listen to then we might as well invite prince andrew over here to fuck little girls on epstein’s island and avoid prosecution.
ADL does a lot of the footwork in these firms pulling ads from inconvenient platforms. Companies are essentially threatened with legal action, and financial consequences, unless they obey. So they figure fuck it, this isn't our hill to die on.
Isn’t it nice to live in a world where an accusation is taken as the gospel truth
Meanwhile, Tara Reade's accusations against Biden still get ignored by many.
"I believe you, but you need to shut your mouth."
Damn, was that a real response?
Mostly, the original response I'm paraphrasing was this:
I will remind you that Tara Read accused, and has been accusing, Joe Biden of digitally raping her with force for several decades. Not just "I regret us fooling around", but him being a creep (impossibru); her rejecting his advances; then him grabbing her arm, forcing her against a wall, shoving his fingers inside of her, and telling her that she liked it. So, you know, actual rape. She made an initial police report and everything. The author believes Tara Read was raped; but did you know that Pence doesn't have sex with other women? That's even worse.
This is also a reminder that Utilitarianism is evil, and barely a valid ethical framework.
I remember a leftie site trying to explain why the accusations against Kavanaugh were credible but not the ones against Biden
Cardi B admitted drugging and robbing innocent victims.
Is still monetized and promoted on youtube.
Pathetic. And they will defend that
chris brown was convicted in court.
still on youtube and monetized.
They seem to have ignored the point that one is a serial hair-smelling creep since his whole life, and the other one nobody had said a bad word about until his confirmation. Hell, Kavanaugh is still non-confrontational from what I can tell, compared to the others.
I agree with the lefties that you have to assess plausibility, though. Neither believing all women nor disbelieving them all is the correct attitude. And people are welcome to believe whatever they want, but if they keep harping on it I'm going to call them retards. It's not the end of the world.
I agree, but you can blame metoo for people being skeptical of accusations now
Trial by Twitter.
I fucking hate leftists with every fibre of my being.
I would have respect for them too, I'd just respectfully ask them to improve the UI, discoverability on that platform without ALREADY knowing the creator (like from YouTube) is awful on there.
For now, Rumble will remain far more niche - it does not have the resources to be competitive with Youtube even in terms of UI, etc. But it will keep improving as it grows.
Considering every new YouTube UI enhancement has been user hostile for a while (downvotes, search, order by age, playlists), the lack of "enhancement" for Rumble can only be seen as a good thing.
Like I said in the other thread, Rumble has no raison d'etre if they censor just as much as YouTube. I think in this particular case, the right thing to do is aligned with their monetary interest.
I can't remember if this is true of Rumble, but some of the alternatives' clients still lack the usability and features of YouTube. That's ok as long as there's some reason to be on Rumble.
Brand must have really struck a nerve if WEF, Soros, Big Pharma and their minions are so hysterically going after him.
Over target, Russell. Keep dropping truth bombs.
He's been pushing against the vax and all the shadiness behind it for a while. This feels like a pre-emptive takedown before the next rollout.
I imagine they're trying to get an angle on Jimmy Dore as well. But TYT took their best shot and he seemed to laugh it off. Even more amusing is that Kasparian seems to be getting more red pilled by the day.
Apparently even people connected to the UK government, too. But I guess you already mentioned globalist minions...
Huh.
It's theft, pure and simple.
The Times writes:
It seems that these fake media companies did not contact the advertisers, but that this was done by an organization called 'The News Movement'. It barely has an online footprint. It has 31,000 followers on Instagram, a similar number of Youtube subscribers, and barely any views at all. Seems like an astroturfing operation.
And it turns out that, yes, these pieces of shit have been contacting advertisers to threaten them:
Basically, everything else they're posting is BS - from Erdogan complaining about LGBTP, a girl being suspended for her hair, and some idiot football player complaining about different teams by gender.
It's not the "News Movement" - it was the UK Government that did it. This is not "collusion", this is illegal government censorship by an out of control totalitarian government.
Look, If Brand is tried and convicted THEN you can deperson him - but all we have now is cackling hen gossip and accusations that would make the witches of the Crucible blush.
These evil regimes need to be overturned and our rights and liberties restored.
I mean if you're talking about totalitarian governments, historically they've not been shy of kangaroo courts and show trials. So even them it probably isn't universally justifiable.
Right - but at least have the PRETENSE instead of depersoning him on mere accusations alone.
Witchhunts are still just that...
That requires work, which modern communists are averse to.
So if Russell Brand floats…
Has he even been accused of anything that he could be convicted of? All I've heard so far is "sexual misconduct" (aka bullshit) and "didn't use a condom in otherwise consensual sex." Oh, and one time he had a "look." Can't forget about that damning accusation.
Because of the UK's laws on sex, they might be able to convince someone that sex with deception was rape, but that definition would be retroactively applied since his sexual activity predated the new definition of rape. That being said, it's not possible to get more evidence, so that's all that there's ever going to be at this point.
They couldn't convict him even if he actually did rape someone because there's no evidence left.
I think there's one or two accusations of rape in there.
As for condoms, I don't think it's consensual if you agree on sex with a condom and your guy then takes it off.
Now I don't got a vagina, but I'll make the assumption you can probably tell when one is on versus off as it plunges into your slophole.
Which leaves the only two options of you called him out on this, during which he continued and its just regular rape, or you didn't, meaning you let him violate your "consent" silently and I have no respect or sympathy for you.
Basically, the condom thing means nothing because its still either just fucking rape or he didn't know it was nonconsensual. Same as always.
It was Dinenage that contacted the media platforms, this is some random outfit contacting Rumble advertisers on the heels of that, in a transparent attempt to fit them up for their own allegations that they support rape.
Unless he's advocating rape in his videos, I don't see why he should be banned even if he was guilty.
Yeah. Its kinda funny. Even if person is demonetized, youtube still play ads on them rofl..
Yeah.. ive been demonetized for 8+ years. Was making 1.2k a month back then before youtube got all faggoty.
YouTube really should be liable for that. They made an editorial choice when they demonitized the channel, they acted in the role of publisher, not platform. So to monetize a demonetized channel, they are acknowledging the content as being unfit for publishing, but profiting off of publishing it.
It's the same group of mostly transgender communists who have been using the same terrorist tactics against whoever they're pointed towards for decades. It'll never stop until there's a law that means people like Nandini Jammi are isolated in prison for the rest of their lives that gets harshly enforced.
Post 2015 we've all been stuck in: The Crucible MMO. Where a cadre of little girls run the world with allegations and whisper networks. You can't even pull a John Proctor sacrifice to break the collective stranglehold, because corporate media will twist or hide the moment.
I would like to remind everyone that the Ad Agencies are the enemy.
They have been intentionally designed to act as a government psy-op for decades now; they control the entirety of our main communication, and they are powerful enough to make American Express and CocaCola bend the fucking knee. This is one of the major sources of the oligarchy.
The thingOne of the things I hate about this shit is, it's hard to tell if these people are malicious, orretardedmalicious and retarded.Cancel culture is just the norm now, sadly. Free speech isn't. Is this companies just doing what's expected of them, companies being insufferable woke bastards, or some combination. Regardless, fuck 'em.
Also, I called this. Everyone's in on it, this is coming from NGOs and governments, as well as private (bad) actors. Russell Brand has been on the list for now, and they've finally sent the first wave of actual goons after poking at him with a stick for a while.
Here's (one of) the stupid fucking things. These companies are under no obligation to kick anyone off (except under rare circumstances where someone is actually barred by a court from accessing the internet, which I think is almost always bullshit anyway, unless they're actually in prison at the time) of their platforms. Russell Brand could actually be convicted of rape and sent to jail (he won't be), and Rumble could still say..."Well, his content isn't breaking any rules on our site.
Off-site rules are evil. Again, outside of specific circumstances. If I was a company, and someone was using their same persona on another platform, and he was actively advocating for people to go around raping people, or something, yeah, I can understand wanting to distance myself from that person. Other than that, if you're not breaking rules on my hypothetical site, I don't care. Convicts still have rights...much less a celebrity being accused by the media smear campaigns about shit that happened decades ago.
TL;DR: Companies pulling ads over this are prime bitches, and either hate or don't understand freedom and our country.
The danger here is that the companies themselves might not even be the ones that are deciding to pull the ads, but the ad agencies themselves that are explicitly partisan
What would be forcing them to use those companies?
Ease of use for doing all the marketing activities at a much cheaper price
There is no competition with the oligarchs. Any that compete get purchased or put out of business.
Never assume anything that benefits leftists is anything but pure malice.
Eh, the phrase "useful idiots" get's thrown around a lot. And we know how invasive these pests are. Not trying to simp for companies, but point is, not all of them are necessarily actively woke. Some of it could be essentially HR nonsense, and not coming from the very top. Doesn't absolve them and, like I said, regardless of their reasons, their lack of standing up for basic American freedoms is to absolutely be condemned.
So, yes, the corporations deserve blame, absolutely. But I don't think they're the final ones pulling the strings. They're dancing to Blackrock/Vanguard/ESG/DIE/etc.'s tunes, and those organizations are dancing to tunes of even more shadowy players.
Again, not simping for them or anything, but they're playing within the current system, is my point. Which is what makes it so frustrating; the current system incentivizes (and incentives at the highest level of the corporate world are essentially compulsions) cancerous and anti-American actions.
So their marketing department is still left infested that they can't see the best thing to do is shut up and hunker down in a situation like this.
They've now just raised their heads above the parapet doing this so if Russell Brand's video on Monday is well received and shifts the narrative from rape allegations to governmental censorship, they're not in a good position and are ALL services that can easily be boycotted like budweiser.
Rumble should have a policy to give channels a realtime, detailed breakdown of advertisers and amounts.
Then Russel Brand can weaponize this by singling out advertisers that left and instructing his audience to boycott them - either one at a time or a big list. Even if it's a small channel of like 10k viewers, let the creator say "looks like Burger King doesn't want your money, guys".
Flip the script so advertisers fear removing their money in a witchhunt like this. As it is we don't know who to boycott. The News Movement - the enemy - isn't a trusted source for anything.
While I still have the ability to within the law, I bought another Roku device to join the one I won in a competition a couple of years ago, downloaded the Rumble app onto it (they don't support Google TV/casting) and can now view content on TV. Consider this my middle finger to the cancel culture brigade.
I'm not surprised that Burger
FagKing pulled their ads. I'm surprised that they were advertising on Rumble in the first place. Remember, their marketing has been woke for a long time. They were the inspiration for the "burgers?" meme.Meanwhile Cardi B admitted drugging men to steal cash.
Cardi B makes money from her music, which is available to buy and stream on platforms like iTunes, Apple Music, and Spotify. She also earns money from endorsements and sponsorships through companies like Pepsi, Reebok, and Steve Madden
If you let the UK government control what journalists we are allowed to listen to then we might as well invite prince andrew over here to fuck little girls on epstein’s island and avoid prosecution.
Wait a minute...
Im so disapointed. wonder how shad feels about this
Wait.. theres monetization on rumble? Damn i should start uploading vids there.. or at least a catalogue of all of my old videos.
ADL does a lot of the footwork in these firms pulling ads from inconvenient platforms. Companies are essentially threatened with legal action, and financial consequences, unless they obey. So they figure fuck it, this isn't our hill to die on.
Blade goes both way. Find the CEOs of the ad agencies and start accusing them.
All this is doing is telling me I better pay close attention to what he has to say.
Then I know what to leave alone, and it's not rumble.
Clearly that advertisement firm was too fickle to have any balls anyway. Good riddance I say.