Posted on May 30, 2018

YouTube Censors Strike Again

Jared Taylor, American Renaissance, May 30, 2018

Yesterday, YouTube quarantined one of our videos: my speech at the American Renaissance conference in April. This is the third AmRen video YouTube has “restricted” since it started a new crackdown policy last August. “Restriction” means you have to click through a warning screen to watch the video, you can’t comment on it, and there is no indication of the number of views. The worst result is that YouTube will never “suggest” a “restricted” video to viewers, and YouTube suggestions are one of the ways people find out about us.

“Restriction” falls short of deletion. As YouTube explains, it has an outright ban on “hate speech or content that promotes or incites violence,” but there is a middle ground:

Some borderline videos, such as those containing inflammatory religious or supremacist content without a direct call to violence or a primary purpose of inciting hatred, may not cross these lines for removal. Following user reports, if our review teams determine that a video is borderline under our policies, it may have some features disabled.

So, apparently our videos have “inflammatory religious or supremacist content,” but they don’t incite hatred as their “primary purpose.” Of course, there is nothing supremacist in our videos, and we don’t incite hatred. Judge for yourself:

How to Achieve Racial Separation, October 3, 2017.

Let’s Break a Taboo, Part 2, October 17, 2017

Irreconcilable Differences: We Need A Divorce, May 25, 2018

The first and third videos are about racial separation, a subject that seems to distress YouTube. In both videos, I argued that our attempt to build a multi-racial society has failed, and that voluntary separation is the best solution. Anyone who wanted to stay in the multi-culti paradise would be free to do so, but the rest of us should be able to build separate communities of our own. Where’s the “supremacist content”? The hatred? It’s clear that the mere idea of separation is just too horrible for YouTube.

(Credit Image: © Jaap Arriens/NurPhoto via ZUMA Press)

In “Let’s Break a Taboo, Part 2,” I explained that Americans practice eugenics but are afraid to say so. The purpose of amniocentesis, genetic testing, and careful selection of sperm and egg donors is to avoid undesirable genetic traits and encourage good ones. I said that the principles of plant and animal breeding apply to us, too, and that we should think about humane ways to improve our species. Apparently this is too shocking for YouTube, and yet, “Let’s Break a Taboo, Part 1”—which covers many of the same ideas—remains unmolested.

If I were making videos promoting proletarian revolution or luridly describing the sins of white people, YouTube wouldn’t complain. It has a bias; it doesn’t like our ideas. It can quarantine or remove our videos and even take down our entire video channel—not because we have violated their standards or done anything wrong but because it doesn’t like what we say.

Facebook and Twitter also claim the right to muzzle people they don’t like. There is nothing to stop them from snuffing out every remotely dissident voice. The internet is, at least for now, our best way to reach new people; loss of access would be a terrible blow.

And that, of course, is why we are suing Twitter. If we are successful, Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook will all have to permit all viewpoints. They will still be able to stop obscenity, libel, copyright violation, and illegal activity, but they won’t be able to censor because they don’t like what we say.

We are subject to the whim of people who hate us. The SPLC is a YouTube “trusted flagger,” which means it advises the company on content it should ban. Our sworn enemies are censoring us.

We need your help to fight back! Please contribute generously to our legal fund here. If you prefer to contribute by check—and we pay no fees on checks—please mail to Box 527 Oakton, VA 22124.