Ben Stein suspended from YouTube for talking about forbidden topics

[+OverSword]

Quote

 

I am reeling. Last night, as I have been doing for months, I did an episode of “my” internet show, “The World According to Ben Stein.” It’s a panel show lasting about an hour. The producer is my pal, Judah Friedman. None of us gets paid a dime. We talk about politics and economics and sometimes about internet dating (although I am happily married and don’t do internet dating). It’s a very small little enterprise, and we are all skeptical about everything.

Until last night you could watch it on YouTube and Rumble and many other sites. Last night we talked about (among many other things) the Covid vaccine mandate. We all talked whether or not the vaccines worked as well as they might have been hoped to work. We also talked about why so many people who have been vaccinated seem to have come down with Covid anyway.

But we all said that if our doctors approved, we would get Jab No. 3 as soon as it’s available.

And at the end, as always, I sang, “How Great Thou Art” or some other song. And then I made fresh salmon for my wife and my caregiver, a charming Filipino man with the interesting name of Leibniz Lopez.

 

link

Read the rest and see what you think about his free speech points and YouTube

[Silver]

Got this from wikipedia:

Stein has denounced the scientific theory of evolution, which he and other intelligent design advocates call "Darwinism", declaring it to be "a painful, bloody chapter in the history of ideologies", "the most compelling argument yet for Imperialism", and the inspiration for the Holocaust.[44][45] Stein does not say belief in evolution alone leads to genocide, but that scientific materialism is a necessary component.[46] He co-wrote and stars in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a film that aims to persuade viewers that evolution was instrumental to the rise of the eugenics movement, Nazi Germany, and the Holocaust, and portrays advocates of intelligent design as victims of intellectual discrimination by the scientific community, which has rejected intelligent design as creationist pseudoscience.[47][48][49] In the trailer for the film, Stein said that his aim was to expose "people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can’t possibly touch God."[50]

Many critics point out that Stein selectively used and edited quotes by Charles Darwin to make his case in Expelled, also noting that scenes shot at Pepperdine University, in which Stein gives a speech to an auditorium full of students, in fact used a large number of extras, hired to respond favorably to Stein's speech, to fill the room.[51] The media response to the film has been largely unfavorable. It received an 11% meta-score from Rotten Tomatoes. Multiple reviews, including those of USA Today and Scientific American, have described the film as propaganda.[47][48][49]

A week isn't enough, a life time ban would be better. He seems to live off controversy.

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by The Silver Shroud

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, The Silver Shroud said:

Got this from wikipedia:

No link.

[+Liquid Gardens]

Quote

"Now, observe what has happened. YouTube is such an immense communications entity that to be banned from it is to banned from national mass communication. Yes, it’s not part of the government, so the First Amendment does not strictly apply to it. BUT, it is so big that it approximates the government. And to be banned from it is to be banned from national debate on important issues."

Utter nonsense. Facebook has more subscribers than youtube, there's Twitter, he can make his own blog, etc.  He's suspended for a week, his remaining opportunities for 'mass communication' are too numerous to count. 

[+OverSword]

Just now, Liquid Gardens said:

Utter nonsense. Facebook has more subscribers than youtube, there's Twitter, he can make his own blog, etc.  He's suspended for a week, his remaining opportunities for 'mass communication' are too numerous to count. 

I'm not on FaceBook, or Twitter and couldn't be persuaded to be.  

[+OverSword]

11 minutes ago, The Silver Shroud said:

Got this from wikipedia:

Stein has denounced the scientific theory of evolution, which he and other intelligent design advocates call "Darwinism", declaring it to be "a painful, bloody chapter in the history of ideologies", "the most compelling argument yet for Imperialism", and the inspiration for the Holocaust.[44][45] Stein does not say belief in evolution alone leads to genocide, but that scientific materialism is a necessary component.[46] He co-wrote and stars in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a film that aims to persuade viewers that evolution was instrumental to the rise of the eugenics movement, Nazi Germany, and the Holocaust, and portrays advocates of intelligent design as victims of intellectual discrimination by the scientific community, which has rejected intelligent design as creationist pseudoscience.[47][48][49] In the trailer for the film, Stein said that his aim was to expose "people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can’t possibly touch God."[50]

Many critics point out that Stein selectively used and edited quotes by Charles Darwin to make his case in Expelled, also noting that scenes shot at Pepperdine University, in which Stein gives a speech to an auditorium full of students, in fact used a large number of extras, hired to respond favorably to Stein's speech, to fill the room.[51] The media response to the film has been largely unfavorable. It received an 11% meta-score from Rotten Tomatoes. Multiple reviews, including those of USA Today and Scientific American, have described the film as propaganda.[47][48][49]

A week isn't enough, a life time ban would be better. He seems to live off controversy.

 

He does not say the theory of evolution is false he says it was used in part to justify the holocaust.  Not the same thing.  Not a crime to make a movie with bad reviews.  

Edited September 13, 2021 by OverSword

[spartan max2]

10 minutes ago, The Silver Shroud said:

Got this from wikipedia:

Stein has denounced the scientific theory of evolution, which he and other intelligent design advocates call "Darwinism", declaring it to be "a painful, bloody chapter in the history of ideologies", "the most compelling argument yet for Imperialism", and the inspiration for the Holocaust.[44][45] Stein does not say belief in evolution alone leads to genocide, but that scientific materialism is a necessary component.[46] He co-wrote and stars in Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed, a film that aims to persuade viewers that evolution was instrumental to the rise of the eugenics movement, Nazi Germany, and the Holocaust, and portrays advocates of intelligent design as victims of intellectual discrimination by the scientific community, which has rejected intelligent design as creationist pseudoscience.[47][48][49] In the trailer for the film, Stein said that his aim was to expose "people out there who want to keep science in a little box where it can’t possibly touch God."[50]

Many critics point out that Stein selectively used and edited quotes by Charles Darwin to make his case in Expelled, also noting that scenes shot at Pepperdine University, in which Stein gives a speech to an auditorium full of students, in fact used a large number of extras, hired to respond favorably to Stein's speech, to fill the room.[51] The media response to the film has been largely unfavorable. It received an 11% meta-score from Rotten Tomatoes. Multiple reviews, including those of USA Today and Scientific American, have described the film as propaganda.[47][48][49]

A week isn't enough, a life time ban would be better. He seems to live off controversy.

 

What about this needs to be censored? 

Like, you're quoting the wiki I assume as some kind of justification.

Banning people for not believing one evolution is just banning free speech at that point.

And the argument that the rise in the theory of evolution influnced the rise of eugenics is a common thought. Since when is that contraversal let alone censor worthy? 

 

[+OverSword]

Just now, spartan max2 said:

What about this needs to be censored? 

Like, you're quoting the wiki I assume as some kind of justification.

Banning people for not believing one evolution is just banning free speech at that point.

And the argument that the rise in the theory of evolution influnced the rise of eugenics is a common thought. Since when is that contraversal let alone censor worthy? 

 

Also not what they censored him for.

Here is the ridiculous part.  You can go on youtube and find videos of children being sexualized or 70's soft porn with full nudity but adults can't discuss covid in any kind of way that a leftist would consider offensive.  

[spartan max2]

22 minutes ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Utter nonsense. Facebook has more subscribers than youtube, there's Twitter, he can make his own blog, etc.  He's suspended for a week, his remaining opportunities for 'mass communication' are too numerous to count. 

If you got banned from being on Googles platform, than it's like sure. You could technically still be on Yahoo.

But your business is pretty much shot. Your rang of potential new customers are greatly decreased. 

Same with YouTube. What these tech companies say is acceptable to say has a massive effect on what can be said. Or your business is done.

 

Edited September 13, 2021 by spartan max2

[+OverSword]

7 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

If you got banned from being on Googles platform, than it's like sure. You could technically still be on Yahoo.

But your business is pretty much shot. Your rang of potential new customers are greatly decreased. 

Same with YouTube. What these tech companies say is acceptable to say has a massive effect on what can be said. Or your business is done.

 

And if there is competition they just talk to their buddies at AWS and have them de-platformed.  Could it be that powers in the government have stayed away from effective regulation of these big tech companies as long as they back the line of the party in charge?  Hmm? Good conspiracy theory.

[Buzz_Light_Year]

5 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Could it be that powers in the government have stayed away from effective regulation of these big tech companies as long as they back the line of the party in charge? 

Yeah under Obama Google was a mainstay at the White House at the tune of about 427 times.

https://thehill.com/policy/technology/277251-report-highlights-hundreds-of-meetings-between-white-house-and-google

Also..........

Quote

The numbers also show 55 times in which Google employees took jobs in the federal government, and 197 times when government employees went to work for Google. 

Quote

In a post last March, Google wrote, “Of course we’ve had many meetings at the White House over the years.” The company said the meetings were on a range of topics, including self driving cars, advertising, internet censorship, trade, cybersecurity, civic innovation, help with HealthCare.gov and other issues.

 

[+Liquid Gardens]

18 minutes ago, spartan max2 said:

But your business is pretty much shot. Your rang of potential new customers are greatly decreased. 

This is part of being in business.  Suppliers are not under obligation to supply you usually, you aren't owed anyone else's audience or communication platform.  If you get banned from youtube you can go reach more people on facebook, and reach far more people than anyone could in the pre-internet era where apparently people didn't have freedom of speech because youtube didn't exist yet...

What about YouTube's freedom, do they have to accept holocaust deniers? Why not?  And what does that do for their business?

[Silver]

29 minutes ago, OverSword said:

Also not what they censored him for.

Here is the ridiculous part.  You can go on youtube and find videos of children being sexualized or 70's soft porn with full nudity but adults can't discuss covid in any kind of way that a leftist would consider offensive.  

I'm just pointing out it seems he makes a living out of controversy. I nothing about him apart from what you supplied and I looked him up.

Covid is in a different category, as you know. It is not offending some people, like soft porn.

[quiXilver]

Break those f'ing monopolies up already.

[+OverSword]

1 minute ago, quiXilver said:

Break those f'ing monopolies up already.

We need an honest government for that.  It ain't going to happen soon.

[+Liquid Gardens]

1 hour ago, quiXilver said:

Break those f'ing monopolies up already.

YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, Yelp, Reddit, TikTok, LinkedIn, Imgur, Pinterest, Vimeo, and possibly Twitter and Tumblr although they may only allow shorter clips, are the short list of options for uploading videos to the web.

[Tatetopa]

2 hours ago, OverSword said:

We need an honest government for that.  It ain't going to happen soon.

It ain't ever going to happen as long as both parties are on the payroll of  corporations and elites.  When you buy a Congressman, you expect results, even though they don't seem to be that expensive. 

Maybe we could start a GoFundMe and  buy one of our own.

[Oniomancer]

Quote

aims to persuade viewers that evolution was instrumental to the rise of the eugenics movement, Nazi Germany, and the Holocaust,

That's kind of like saying the discovery of fire was instrumental in the rise of arson, the military industrial complex and the inquisition.  It's factually correct but it kind of misses the point. I don't know where if anywhere that fits on the list of logical fallacies but If that sort of willfully misleading statement is representative of his arguments on covid, it's small wonder he got banned.

[el midgetron]

I think its obvious that Darwinism gave rise to eugenics. I didn’t even know there was a question about this. The fella who coined the term “eugenics” was Francis Galton. Francis Galton was Charles Darwin’s cousin, 

Quote

The publication by his cousin Charles Darwin of The Origin of Species in 1859 was an event that changed Galton's life.[22] He came to be gripped by the work, especially the first chapter on "Variation under Domestication", concerning animal breeding.

Galton devoted much of the rest of his life to exploring variation in human populations and its implications, at which Darwin had only hinted in The Origin of Species, although he returned to it in his 1871 book The Descent of Man, drawing on his cousin's work in the intervening period. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton#Heredity_and_eugenics

 

Quote

Madison Grant (November 19, 1865 – May 30, 1937) was an American lawyer, writer, and zoologist known primarily for his work as a eugenicist and conservationist, an advocate of scientific racism and as one of the leading thinkers and activists of the Progressive Era. 

As a eugenicist, Grant was the author of The Passing of the Great Race (1916), a work espousing scientific racism, and played an active role in crafting strong immigration restriction and anti-miscegenation laws in the United States.

———

Stephen Jay Gould described The Passing of the Great Race as "the most influential tract of American scientific racism".[16] Grant's work was embraced by proponents of the National Socialist movement in Germany and was the first non-German book ordered to be reprinted by the Nazis when they took power. Adolf Hitler wrote to Grant, "The book is my Bible."[6]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Grant

[Tatetopa]

Was Ben Stein the deadpan teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off"?

[el midgetron]

11 minutes ago, Tatetopa said:

Was Ben Stein the deadpan teacher in Ferris Bueller's Day Off"?

Yep

[Silver]

1 hour ago, el midgetron said:

I think its obvious that Darwinism gave rise to eugenics. I didn’t even know there was a question about this. The fella who coined the term “eugenics” was Francis Galton. Francis Galton was Charles Darwin’s cousin, 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton#Heredity_and_eugenics

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Madison_Grant

This is very misleading. Subverting science does not mean that science 'gave rise to' the subversion.I think you also like being controversial!

 

[toast]

9 hours ago, OverSword said:

Read the rest and see what you think about his free speech points and YouTube

First of all there is a lie in the very beginning of the article because "None of us gets paid a dime" isnt true. Ok, he is not making much money with his YT channel but its >"than a dime": socialblade.

Second: " We also talked about why so many people who have been vaccinated seem to have come down with Covid anyway." Discussing an issue that require competence need competent interlocutors but the above statement is a proof that he/they should better discuss about fishing, bicycling or something like that but not about something that require at least the basics of virology/vaccines etc.

Third: any discussion about allegedly restriction of free speech by getting banned from a privat and/or company operated public board is absurd. The freedom of speech in public is granted by constitution or even not like in NK for example. To get banned from such boards dont restrict the freedom of speech in general but its also the freedom of the operator to decide what to publish or not.

[aztek]

11 hours ago, spartan max2 said:

What about this needs to be censored? 

Like, you're quoting the wiki I assume as some kind of justification.

Banning people for not believing one evolution is just banning free speech at that point.

And the argument that the rise in the theory of evolution influnced the rise of eugenics is a common thought. Since when is that contraversal let alone censor worthy? 

 

subjects and citizens have very different mindset. they will never see things the same

[el midgetron]

5 hours ago, The Silver Shroud said:

This is very misleading. Subverting science does not mean that science 'gave rise to' the subversion.I think you also like being controversial!

No it is’t “misleading”, it’s historical fact. Galton took Darwin’s ideas just one step further. If that direct relation of just one degree of separation isn’t “giving rise to” then I don’t know what is. If you wish to pretend like science is somehow defined by social morality and those who depart from that morality are “subverting” science knock your self out.