|
| Thread: The Mike Benz interview |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · NEXT» |
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
posted February 19, 2024 04:22 PM |
|
|
The Mike Benz interview
I have my reservations when it comes to Tucker Carlson from his days in Fox News but this is really an interview that broadens your perspective.
Benz
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
yogi
Promising
Famous Hero
of picnics
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 05:43 PM |
|
Edited by yogi at 17:45, 19 Feb 2024.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 07:50 PM |
|
|
Jesus. I stopped after 12 minutes. Alt right propaganda show. 
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 08:00 PM |
|
|
He speaks about departments and systems that exist, as an insider, with factual detail.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
Ghost
Undefeatable Hero
Therefore I am
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 08:12 PM |
|
|
JollyJoker said:
Jesus. I stopped after 12 minutes. Alt right propaganda show.
Aha.. I beat you, I stopped after 2 minutes?! Thus incomplete/imperfect subtitle!
@artu
Yes I know TC, when he interviewed Putin also TC got shoes from TV..
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 08:45 PM |
|
|
artu said:
He speaks about departments and systems that exist, as an insider, with factual detail.
He has an agenda with his "censorhip-free internet" society. And he's telling a completely idiotic narrative. The whole premise of this "interview" is shambolic.
There is no uninhibited freedom of speech - has never been: you may not offend other people, for example. You must not slander them either. You cannot just claim wild things about people and then defend yourself with freedom of speech.
So why would that be different in the internet? True is, slandering and offending in the internet is a lot easier than everywhere else because people/organisations can create aliases which often means you cannot really do anything against it, because you may not be able to nail the offending/slandering parties.
So to protect against being slandered and offended, new mechanisms must be found for the new media.
Everyone can use the internet to spread fake news and desinformation, and this is done on a massive level nowadays, and for a long time already.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 09:30 PM |
|
|
First of all, anything apart from hate speech that realistically put people in danger and fabricated accusations that have real life effects on your life (such as claiming there are rats in the restaurant that is your rival) should be protected by free speech. Words can offend but they cant harm you. So yes, freedom of speech is not and never was limitless but to use that to excuse the level of censorship he gives examples of, (and state level censorship, not private sector) is actually defending censorship from a power elite and I don t see how objecting to that is “alt-right.”
Dont label it, just look at his examples. There are politicians who openly suggest revoking the first amendment because “ it was not meant for the age of internet.” Social media platforms either agree to install language processing mechanisms to their sites that detect unwanted arguments or pay 50 million dollar fines per any comment that is considered “disinformation.” Not even offensive language, just disinformation, which has an open-ended definition. We’re going backwards in terms of freedom of speech, not forwards. He has very valid examples of that and to oppose the situation is a legit agenda, not a sinister one. But if you prefer to label it “alt-right” only because it is Carlson that is doing the interview without even properly watching it, well…
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 19, 2024 11:20 PM |
|
|
Benz is alt-right as well.
You have to see the bigger picture here. The bigger picture is the ideals of human rights, democracy (as a means for the general pop having a political voice) and so on, including "free speech" come from a time with way more limited means for the individual, but also for interest groups. It compares to, say, the right to wear weapons - when that was enacted, people couldn't envision something like automatic weapons able to kill dozens.
Same thing with the internet.
If everyone can tell every lie they want, truth is lost - which is something a lot of people have an interest in. Organized desinformation, the destabilization of societies. Look at how divided the democraciess of the world are. Of course we are going backwards with freedom of speech, because - in case you didn't notice it you should open your eyes - the world in which there is freedom of speech (and correct me if I'm wrong, but Turkey isn't a state in which there is that) - the societies/states/democracies in which that has been a thing are all under attack. DEMOCRACY is in full retreat, since - as the Germans have proven last century - it delivers its enemies the weapons to destroy it. 91 yearas ago German Democracy ended itself, abused by people who didn't care for it, but took the opening they offered.
Same thing today - now with "freedom of speech" being the battle cry (and has been for a decade actually - we alreaady discussed that). I mean, OF COURSE limiting freedom of speech will limit people's rights and will lead to manipulation - but that's what happens when you are attacked. Look what happened after 9/11.
The question, how much democracy can be sacrificed to guard it, before it's not enough of it left to make guarding it worth it, is an old one. That point may not be far away anymore, but the alternative is pretty scary as well.
Look, the problem isn't that every idiot can post any idiotic thing they want to post. The problem is that this can be used as a weapon by every interest group (and I use that in a very wide sense) in order to further their agenda. Lies and desinformation -> destabilization; people are riled up systematically.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 03:05 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 04:59, 20 Feb 2024.
|
That’s the point. I don’t think USA or Europe is extremely different than Turkey anymore. We also have freedom of speech in theory, “with exceptions” of course. Yes, the magnitude of how laws about such exceptions serve the arbitrary cherry-pickings of the government in power is worse here, but that is only natural, since traditionally liberal democracies are getting also worse. It is your usual “everybody's doing it” mentality.
And (national) security has always been the excuse to do that, hasnt it? If we are going to label any argument right-wing, it is certainly that: How freedom of speech threatens national security and interest. This was also accurate in Nazi Germany as well. The U.S. government agencies had no problem with internet disinformation or disinformation in general, up until the point it served them. If you listen, he gives a detailed history of that also, quoting ex-CIA officers from their own memoirs and so on… What truth? It is about conflict of interest as usual.
What makes you think that we can trust governmental power structures more than we used to than in times people came up with freedom of speech to keep those very structures in check. Yours is basically a recipe for authoritarianism. And we are going that way, worse in countries like mine sure, but contemporary USA is no beacon of freedom either. Your argument is kind of like saying “well, yes, after industrialization, workers fought for union rights and got them, but in these times, they are controlled by the mafia so all unions should be closed down, period.” Internet does bring its own problems, like any major game changer but trusting your rights with state agencies that are behaving less and less democratic each year is not the solution to that. The natural tendency of power structures are to expand, that’s why we invented tools for checks and balances, freedom of speech, separationof powers, how you can only get elected a limited number of times etc. etc. You cant abandon these and remain a liberal democracy, and then claim you are doing it to protect liberal democracy. It doesn't work that way.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 07:50 AM |
|
|
You have freedom of speech? Then go ahead - start bashing religion and try to promote real gender equality. Especially when you are female. Go and organize an anti-islam demonstration before a mosque. Or just make a website and attack the islam.
Anyway. Democracy and basic rights are centered around the idea that everyone wants them and cares for keeping them. That's not the case, though. The best tactics to destroy them is to use the freedom and latitude they offer to destabilize them: testing the patience. Both left and right extremists have followed the same tactics in the last third of the last century: terror with the aim to provoke a more authoritarian course in order to mobilize the population against that. It's basically like children slapping their parents, until the parents start shackling their hands, so the children can start to cry, we are mistreated.
Now, with the internet you don't need terror anymore. You don't even need secret services having real agents in another country, like in The Americans or any 20th century spy movie. You can get the same results with concerted, massed desinformation campaigns. People leave prints in the internet and can be spied out with a PC. If a couple of seemingly independent sources post something this may be reposted a thousand times within a day, get ten thousands of likes and become an internet storm - even though it's based on lies or faked facts.
What do you think why TUCKER is so interested in this? Do you think, he suddenly has an interest in freedom and democracy when he's been a pawn of Trump the whole time before? Think how Trump got pres and how he manages to maintain a hold over big parts of the Republican voters. It's all just manipulation, but what is happening is no different from the end of the 70s in Germany, when the state reacted to the RAF's terror attacks.
Let me EDIT this to add that I don't like what happens and that I do think that our current political structures have a couple of flaws and their direction isn't all that great - but I also think that the likes of Tucker Carlson and what he supports and stands for won't make it BETTER, but worse, yet. Which is the problem. If something mediocre is getting flak from something that is worse, it will inevitable slide into the direction of worse. What we are missing is flak from something that is BETTER. We are missing that dearly.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 08:48 AM |
|
Edited by artu at 08:50, 20 Feb 2024.
|
You can promote gender equality, they wont directly ban that but it is not de facto existent, it isnt 100 percent existent anywhere,anyway. Religion bashing, you can get away with it on the internet if you are not famous or anything, but if you are someone who is someone they will get you from hate speech laws or laws that forbid “offending the moral values of the public” and so on…
Which is not overwhelmingly different than the West nowadays, anything can be considered hate speech, it all depends on the public standard. In the U.S., you can bash mainstream religion but there are other taboo subjects which you can not touch, unless you are posting from your mother’s garage and have nothing to lose anyway.
I dont know if you actually watched the interview but Benz says the exact same thing you do. That the US government realized it was much cheaper to manipulate public opinion through internet than to stage coups or directly mingle in state affairs, yet, after Brexit and Crimea, they suddenly realized that it’s a blade that cuts both ways, so now, they have a double standard and freedom of speech is not their beloved champion anymore.
I dont care if Tucker Carlson has an agenda, if he wants to support Trump, he has a right to. I dont have to agree with his political views to evaluate the information Benz speaks of. The amount of factual detail Benz gives about how things work post mid-2010’s is not something to skip and it is a “brave new world” indeed.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
baronus
Legendary Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 09:31 AM |
|
Edited by baronus at 09:33, 20 Feb 2024.
|
baronus
As you see after Tucker visit great russian martyr Navalny was murdered. Tucker od ugly and disgusted. Antyintelectual.
But of course neocomunist censorship in USA is more horrible. We need free speach but with high quality juornalism.
All of it is slavery because freedom to lie is de facto slavery. Inner slavery.
https://www.ncregister.com/blog/john-paul-ii-no-freedom-without-truth
https://www.catholiceducation.org/en/religion-and-philosophy/social-justice/john-paul-ii-and-the-truth-about-freedom.html
So no censorship but no more lies!
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 09:42 AM |
|
|
No, that's just bollocks. The only way THE GOVERNMENT can manipulate the public is by controlling the actual media outlets (and, of course indirectly, by lying to them and not get caught). Because THE GOVERNMENT is never UNOPPOSED and that opposition will be fast at it to point out what's happening. So if that was supposed to work there would have to be a DARK government behind the government, a pact between all the institutions and political parties in a quasi-conspiracy with complete control of the mainstream media.
If that was indeed the case there was actually no democracy anymore, which would just be a front - but that can never happen, since there are too many players with too many inconsolable differences in that game. Since we live in a capitalist world, "democracy" isn't what it's supposed to be, true, but that has nothing to do what we talk about here. No matter how big a cartel is, there will always be another one in opposition to it.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 11:58 AM |
|
|
Nope, at this point and since like the last ten years, the social media is as effective as, if not more effective than, the traditional mainstream media. And you dont need to establish a cartel of opinions in there, you just need to catch on. Go viral. That’s what changed. You had some level of control over traditional media, not like a cartel, but something such as Jullian Assange or Edward Snowden was million times less likely to happen without the internet. And even if it did happen, you were still able to damage-control and extinguish it real quick with an army of lawyers. That level of connections and control, the governments always had with mainstream medias. Neither would you have anti-vaccine campaigns. But saying you dont trust the vaccines because they are not tested enough for instance, is neither hate speech nor cyber terrorism nor slander. You can argue that it is a very wrong opinion to have, but people are still entitled to it.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 01:30 PM |
|
|
Dude, social media is completely INEFFECTIVE for democratic governments (in their own country). For a lot of reasons, but mainly because they are THE GOVERNMENT. Everything coming from THEM is - what YOU are saying now: False, fake news, propaganda, bla. Because the government is ALWAYS the evil side, that's the narrative. Lots of people already believe that - politicians are bad and corrupt and so on - so what works is fostering and strengthening that belief, while everything else has no effect. And being really LOUD about it. LOOK at what is ACTUALLY happening.
Italy? Neo fascists.
Germany? Second coming of NSDAP is second strongest party. Current government is at 30% of the votes (if there was an election now). The US? The government is more or less paralyzed and the country is divided like it was 160 years ago. Russia? Dictatorship. China? Likewise.
The only sides profiting from social medea are ANTI-democratic.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 05:36 PM |
|
|
What you’re saying is not that it’s ineffective, what you’re saying is that the opinions that spread from there are considered anti-democratic by you. Once again this is addressed by Benz in the interview. He says from the state’s perspective, through negotiations, democracy is some achieved common ground within certain parties of interest groups, lobbies, civil rights organizations etc., yet they see it as a threat to “that democracy” when the average truck driver votes according to some viral conspiracy about, say, Pizzagate. Cant really remember his example.
I’m not saying internet isnt full of crap, you know, I’m saying they dont know how to handle it anymore, besides, they are full of a different kind of crap themselves anyway. The traditional institutions of politics are quite ineffective, so they are gradually devolving into this post-truth circus.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 06:24 PM |
|
|
That's not how it is. Because it's not the average truck driver who's posting something about some pizzagate. MOSTLY, if it is INDEED an average truck driver (and not someone who POSES as a truck driver) posting, it's a RE-post of something someone else posted (see above).
Why? Because the average truck driver isn't the most orginally inventive kind of guy who pulls some story out of thin air, but insteaad has read about pizzagate someplace else.
Now, if said pizzagate is REAL, then this cannot and won't be forbidden in any way. If it's just a fabrication, though, then it's exactly wwhat makes this so dangerous.
I can't really get my mind behind you falling for this Carlson-Benz propaganda nonsense.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 07:16 PM |
|
|
Truck driver doesnt have to invent it himself, it is enough for it to go viral. And as I already stated, I have no problem with fabricated accusations about individuals not being protected by freedom of speech but the “disinformation” rhetoric is so far from stopping at that.
You are calling something you refuse to watch “propaganda” because of prejudice and talking out points he isnt either claiming or has addressed. USA is in a very strange period in its history, it is transforming into some kind of semi-oligarchy. Their system itself had turned into a kind of grinder that only spits out people who protect a power structure. I am not referring to conspiracies or shadow forces. I am talking about a know-how that reverse engineers democracy. And accordingly, people gradually lose faith in the traditional institutions and the notion that they can bring real change. As an insider, Benz gives us an insight about how that zeitgeist evolved, it is not sheer propaganda, even if it was meant to be.
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 09:12 PM |
|
|
What? The USA have always been some semi-oligarchy with powerful, well-connected families. You can expect a couple of congressmen to be "of the people", but senators most of the time and presidents won't the latter because you have two election campaigns in the US and that will cost a lot of money and need a lot of connections, which the average truck driber doesn't have.
Worst of all, you need to bargain and compromise all the time, to get things done, otherwise you are just blocked. The traditional institutions have always been that way in the US, and not only there. That's why the guys the voters put an expecial amount of hope and trust will always disappoint: last case in point: Obama.
This is nothing to do with zeitgeist; the system is as old as that union of states, but by no means limited to the US.
So I call this still bullsnow - it just seems to support the narrative that the outsider Trump was hellbent to rip that web of corruption and systemic inertia, but they didn't let him and now they try to shut up everyone raising their voice.
|
|
artu
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
My BS sensor is tingling again
|
|
posted February 20, 2024 09:49 PM |
|
Edited by artu at 21:52, 20 Feb 2024.
|
To a degree yes, but the proportion of that is degrading into a grotesque picture, enough to turn democracy seem like a joke. If you are cynical, you can argue that it was always like this but internet made it more obvious. That’s not where I stand personally. (And nobody claimed truck drivers could be candidates with a real shot any time in the past or today, that wasnt the argument at all.)
There are many factors for this amplification, world of finance got too big, and it can simply buy out the legislation processes and election campaigns like candy, surveillance technology got much better, cheaper and extremely available, so you can dig dirt on almost anybody and finish them politically if they dont play ball. The amount of information/disinformation bombardament on the internet dumbed down people, post-truth age distorted all measurable reference systems. Your average person believes the world runs on conspirical, shadow organizations, secret deals in ratios never seen before. Remember the “Paul is dead” conspiracy, the one where McCartney is replaced with a double? Back in 1967, it was for hippies high on acid. Now, I read Beatles threads in social media and a serious amount of people actually defend it, and it’s one thing to believe it in 1967, they believe a double has posed as him for more than 50 years! This is just something to be convinced in now. We are going into strange times.
(Btw, Trump was a fraud but people indeed voted for him because “they thought he was a wrecking ball in a rigged system” to quote Russell Brand. The shortcomings and megalomaniac behavior of Trump, doesnt change the fact that in a first world country people saw him as something preferable to what they perceive as “the establishment.” And they are about to vote for him once again. And the whole thing is just too big to just cover on an anti-Trump basis.)
____________
Are you pretty? This is my occasion. - Ghost
|
| |
|
|
