Did censorship work? - There's been a shift the past few years

censorship works but not in the way most think. people know that they are getting censored and lied too but its the fear of of being ostracized that keeps them from speaking out. dont think for yourself, let others think for you. no need to threaten your own livelihood because of what you think and feel, just follow the herd and you be fine.

covid could not be a better example of this.
 
I would say it doesn't work, but during the past year like @Gravityquen4life said, opened my eyes to a lot. I used to wonder why was it that I noticed things were "off" but at the same time, I didn't bother to correct the people I knew who were spouting that bs.
 
We won't know because it isn't relevant. Communist russia didn't give a shit whether you believed their lies. In fact, they degraded you with a constant stream of nonsense that you had to pretend was true. In that way you become complicit and corrupt yourself.

People need to see other people standing up, so they follow the example and do it too. When they see what we see now, where those who stand up get harassed, receive covert black pr campaigns as well as mainstream ones, then people start to self censor.
Yeah that doesn't get talked about enough. The spiritual degradation that comes with mouthing off platitudes you don't believe. Doing that every day, simply not to be arrested or lose your job has a deleterious effect on people's self respect, inner strength, and their overall virtue.

When you repeat the lies, you corrupt and degrade yourself. You become complicit in them. Any resistance you might now offer is compromised by your earlier submission.
 
Censorship only works if the vast amount of the population eats it up. Otherwise you are just waiting for the regime to fail to get all the mess out in the open.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gender: Xenomorph
Censorship only works if the vast amount of the population eats it up. Otherwise you are just waiting for the regime to fail to get all the mess out in the open.
Censorship is preventing the ideas from reaching the people. A topic where there is effective censorship, one can not choose to eat or not to eat when the ideas don't reach you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: melty
Censorship is preventing the ideas from reaching the people. A topic where there is effective censorship, one can not choose to eat or not to eat when the ideas don't reach you.
But even now there is no way of fully stopping ideas, and I doubt this will ever be the case. The only cases of successful censorship are ones like "the allies did no war crimes in ww2" which only works because the population handily accepts that reality without question (and even then you can find people talking about this subject).
Really, it's far easier to just add disinformation than to stop people from expressing themselves, that and bread and circuses.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FunPosting101
Really, it's far easier to just add disinformation than to stop people from expressing themselves, that and bread and circuses.
But the one-two punch of censorship and adding disinformation works better.

For example, take something like Ryan Dawson's documentary "decades of deception", which while fairly dry, is one of the most complete documentary's on the topic without the need of any conspiracy theories; just a long litany of facts that can be verified.

He got completely removed from youtube. There was also a new documentary made about 9/11 with exactly the same name that does not mention the dancing israelis and focuses almost exclusively on the physics and none of the geopolitics.

That's the thing; people who reject the mainstream 9/11 narrative are generally ill-informed about who were involved with it and if one searches they encounter the misinformation documentaries that deftly make sure to leave out the most important smoking guns and maybe pepper in one or two easily disproven points so that anyone using the misinformation to inform themselves is later easily dispatched.
 
But the one-two punch of censorship and adding disinformation works better.

For example, take something like Ryan Dawson's documentary "decades of deception", which while fairly dry, is one of the most complete documentary's on the topic without the need of any conspiracy theories; just a long litany of facts that can be verified.

He got completely removed from youtube. There was also a new documentary made about 9/11 with exactly the same name that does not mention the dancing israelis and focuses almost exclusively on the physics and none of the geopolitics.

That's the thing; people who reject the mainstream 9/11 narrative are generally ill-informed about who were involved with it and if one searches they encounter the misinformation documentaries that deftly make sure to leave out the most important smoking guns and maybe pepper in one or two easily disproven points so that anyone using the misinformation to inform themselves is later easily dispatched.
I think you are attributing failure of theories to gain traction as the sole result of censorship, rather than the far more likely result of just not being popular or simple enough for proles to understand.
Besides that, 9/11 is one of the subjects that just about everyone heard all the conspiracies about, there isn't really any overwhelming act of censorship there.
 
I think you are attributing failure of theories to gain traction as the sole result of censorship, rather than the far more likely result of just not being popular or simple enough for proles to understand.
When you get removed from youtube and other platforms because your documentaries are a little too truthful, that's censorship.
 
When you get removed from youtube and other platforms because your documentaries are a little too truthful, that's censorship.
Getting removed from YouTube is more about pissing off the right people than actually speaking the truth. Anyways, the question here isn't about censorship being a thing, but rather its effectiveness. And I doubt even without the removal this documentary its subject matter would have become a popular opinion.
 
Getting removed from YouTube is more about pissing off the right people than actually speaking the truth. Anyways, the question here isn't about censorship being a thing, but rather its effectiveness. And I doubt even without the removal this documentary its subject matter would have become a popular opinion.
The truth pisses people off a lot more.

Whether something becomes a popular opinion is a weird and arbitrary base requirement.

Any idea can grow "subscribers" when it can reach people. It can't when it's censored.

The idea that when you manage to prevent material from being spread that doesn't limit their growth of people who subscribe to that idea is just ridiculous. Censorship works. Just like violence, repression, lying and a number of other things most find reprehensible. Yes they work. Yes they're wrong. Yes they invite reprisal. But the idea that it has no effect on spread of ideas is ludicrous.

I can't even imagine why someone would deny it.
 
The truth pisses people off a lot more.

Whether something becomes a popular opinion is a weird and arbitrary base requirement.

Any idea can grow "subscribers" when it can reach people. It can't when it's censored.

The idea that when you manage to prevent material from being spread that doesn't limit their growth of people who subscribe to that idea is just ridiculous. Censorship works. Just like violence, repression, lying and a number of other things most find reprehensible. Yes they work. Yes they're wrong. Yes they invite reprisal. But the idea that it has no effect on spread of ideas is ludicrous.

I can't even imagine why someone would deny it.
If censorship would have worked then none of us would have known the horrors that were commited under the Communist regime. And unlike YouTube, those acts were backed with massive forces and violence both within and outside Soviet Russia.
Censorship might work when it's localized to a small event before it becomes too well known, but if it's not then it's a matter of time before enough people calculate 2+2 in their heads, like how Corona is likely an invention of the Chinese government.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Cilleystring
I agree with those who say censorship is a temporary solution. Its putting a bandaid on cancer. Its like a lolcow rejoicing in getting a troll account shut down and thinking it solves all their issues, while completely missing the point that removing the account does not change the behaviour that earned them the lolcow title.
 
Censorship isn’t designed to convince people who already are skeptical of the powers that be or consider themselves opposed to the System already.

It’s to prevent threatening ideas and information from reaching the mass public and those with the power to act on it.

Take WNism. How many normies have actually been exposed to some reasonable even and calm minded WN explain why a white ethnostate is desirable?

As opposed to a media generated hysteria or taking caricatures or feds shouting about “gas the kikes and niggers!”

The vast majority of people will never be exposed to alternate ideas. That’s the goal. Sure there will always be individuals who are curious or disaffected enough to do their own research and face the social censure that comes with leaving the herd. But censorship is about controlling the mass mind. Not everyone’s mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lemmingwise
Telling someone that an idea isn't popular is almost as good as the idea not being popular. The knowledge that some supposed "unpopular opinions" are not unpopular isn't hidden either.

A lot of this is held together by shared delusion.

The media can in one breath say an "unpopular" idea actually has majority support, and in the next, talk about why the opposing idea is good and which celebrities are promoting it.

In America, we have a kind of open censorship where the government openly admits to many atrocities and the media simply glosses over them. It's not hidden that you spend thousands of dollars every year in taxes to make the MIC richer. It's not hidden that the government has used propoganda to control the populace. I don't know how and why this system came about, but it's slowly eroding the fabric of this country, for the benefit of some short-term conflict avoidance.
 
It's just a consequence of becoming so mainstream.

More people watch stuff on the internet now than people watch a major tv network. Just like you don't see people ranting about the Jews or other fringe stuff on a major network you won't see it on sites like YouTube anymore.
They all just want clean advertising friendly content that won't offend anyone.
 
They didn't change anyone minds. They are just trying to pretend there is no more opposition to the status quo as established by our benevolent corporate overlords. The funny thing is that because they have been so successful at silencing dissent they seem to believe the majority of their societies want the shit they are shoveling down their throats. They are seriously deluding themselves and I fear they won't realize the truth until it's far, far too late to stop what is going to happen.

If you look back at European history you'd probably say that most of medieval Europe was 'good' God fearing Christians. If you looked a little deeper at the Church's propaganda you'd say huh, well thats a hot load of horseshit, and then realize that humans havent changed that much in just a few hundred years, our bullshit detectors were just as good.

Its the same thing, it happens all the time. The majority doenst believe this stuff but they've militarized just enough of the bat shit crazy population to have normal folks who just want to go about their day keep their heads down.

I think you're right that they've begun to eat their own tail, believing the shit they're peddling. At some point the serpent will die but as you say it will be too late.
 
Censorship only works if you have a nigger-tier MUH TRIBE mentality, and only want power for the sake of power. If you have an actual, tangible goal you're trying to achieve, it's important to have accurate beliefs, which censorship gets in the way of. Look at what happened to communism. The communists censored non-communists and had absolute power, but communism eventually collapsed due to its inherent retardation.

cycle of communism.gif
 
Back