Counter Culture Comments

Commentary on pop culture, technology, and society. The official blog of Counter Points Media.

This article is part two in a series by guest contributor Amianon, focusing on the societal impact of the K-Pop boy band and worldwide sensation BTS.

So why all this fuss about Jung? Well, considering this series examines the MKUltra symbolism in BTS' work, the fact that they chose to base an entire album after Jungian philosophy is extremely pertinent. Jung had connections to Allen Dulles and the MKUltra project, and the Jungian process of individuation is heavily similar to the intentional splitting of the mind in the Dulles fashion. But they do not encourage fans to subscribe to this particular method of psychotherapy to the best of my knowledge; their concepts have only touched on these ideas for thematic purpose. If Jung had ill intentions and his psychology relates to BTS' message, (even if he is widely revered for the 'good' he did) that infers sinister intent in BTS' messages, which is highly concerning. They have massive influence among most notably college students (ages 18-24) as well as a minority of teens (16% to 27%) and adults (according to Reuters, a growing share of their audience are in their 40’s and older, which means they often have more disposable income). According to Brandwatch Audiences, adults in creative professions are more likely to engage with the band at 40%, then students at 26%, executives at 12% and health practitioners at 7%, (the remaining percentage undocumented). They're influencing a large part of their demographic people in a highly impressionable stage of life, and their moral compass and worldviews are laced in everything they do. Even watching entertainment-focused content by them such as their daily life may often seem like an invitation to the dinner-table political talk of a mismatched, highly-accomplished and philosophically literate family structure. 'A forced society is a bad society,' Namjoon remarks casually while washing dishes (In the Soop, 2020) after Hoseok tries and fails to gently rouse an exhausted Jimin, who'd stayed up late partying with Jungkook and had no pressing appointments or engagements the entire day. “Let him sleep, we'll save lunch for him.” They're not intentionally political, but their personal views cannot be divorced from their content, unless they maintain an intentionally neutral silence on certain topics to avoid offending their varied and diverse fanbase. And they oftentimes do maintain this stance, but not always; if a topic becomes so serious they feel compelled to do something, they will, as evidenced this year. After looking up, alarmed, to find the United States on fire, they perhaps rashly emptied their pockets of one million dollars in a donation towards Black Lives Matter. But in order to not offend, they aren't very vocal about politics besides occasionally dedicating songs towards these topics; Billboard says: 'the group litters millennial-oriented messages about societal woes throughout their discography,' including songs like 'No More Dream', 'Silver Spoon', as well as 'Am I Wrong' and, to an extent 'Spring Day.' Billboard adds: “The song [Am I Wrong] features Jimin and Jungkook singing about the entire world going crazy, and RM questioning how people don’t react strongly to the state of news and media in this day and age. The message of “Am I Wrong” proved to be prophetic, as Wings was released the same month that a multi-layered corruption scandal erupted that would eventually bring down then-South Korean President Park Geun Hye.” In light of this vaguely anti-governmental sentiment frequently reflected in their songs, I think it's reasonable to assume that the dedication of an entire album to a Jungian theme is purely a stylistic decision and not an endorsement of the sinister MKUltra government program's method of splitting the mind to weaponize it. Devil's advocate: this popularizes and launches a lot of dirty laundry into popular culture, exposing people to dangerous ideas. The response: if you bring to light an abhorrent institution in order to draw attention to how bad it is, are you romanticizing it or creating an added stigma towards those who espouse such values when you are staunchly against it? Food for thought. In conclusion, Jung's methods of dividing the mind ARE utilized by the Map of the Soul: 7 album, but not to weaponize. MOTS:7 diagnoses inner turmoil (Persona), contemplates the turmoil (Shadow) and resolves it (Ego.) The goal is to sort out a bunch of really complicated problems, solve them, and unite eventually into a solution. They do not, in any way, recommend the long-term division of the mind in order to let handlers weaponize and direct it. The members are the ones who compartmentalize each part and 'face' of themselves and not anyone else, as a coping mechanism; the album is primarily about the group's struggle dealing with their burgeoning fame. Being thrust into the spotlight is scary, even if you see it coming a long way off—there are a lot of eyes on you, all the time, and fame takes a toll on anyone, especially if you're worried about maintaining a spotless image. “I’m afraid, flying high is terrifying. No one told me how lonely it is up here,” Yoongi raps in 'Shadow.' “I rise, rise, I hate it/I pray, I pray, hoping to be okay.” Then he, in characteristic BTS fashion, challenges himself: “Wasn’t this the kind of thing you’d been wanting?/The life you hoped for, the life you wanted/The life you chose: you achieved everything without regrets/And on top of that, you have a big house, big cars, big rings/All the things you wanted, you’ve got it all/So what’s the problem? Just enjoy it.”

BTS member Jungkook sends an 'I love you' (Korean/American Sign Language) towards a tense Jimin on the red carpet (Fact Music Awards) in order to elicit a smile. (2019.)

Sometimes it is necessary to maintain a particular 'face' in order to not be nitpicked excessively, your every word dissected. In 'Persona', Namjoon raps, “Who am I? The question I had my whole life/The question which I probably won’t find an answer to my whole life/If I were answerable with a few more words/Then God wouldn’t have created all these various [facets of myself]. I'm still not so sure if I'm a dog or a pig or what else/But then other people come out and put the pearl necklace on me.” He continues later on, “Hey, have you already forgotten why you even started this? You were just digging it that someone was listening. Someone like me ain't good enough for music/Someone like me ain't good enough to be a muse/The flaws of mine that I know/Maybe that's all I've got really/The world is actually not interested in my clumsiness at all.” This fear and anxiety that plagues BTS leader Namjoon he characterizes as another 'face' of himself, and tries to reconcile the fact that as long as he's famous, he's going to be dealing with the conflict for a while. No split personalities found here; just a young man's confidence and uncertainty battling within. “Who the hell am I?” he wonders, and then answers himself that's he's all of these things at once: “The 'me' that I want myself to be/The 'me' that people want me to be/The 'me' that you love/And the 'me' that I create/The 'me' that's smiling/The me that's sometimes in tears/Vividly breathing each second and every moment even now.” They'd prefer you to carefully look back on every aspect of yourself and judge, but also begin to move forwards in life—minus all the emotional baggage. “Where's your soul?” he asks. “Where's your dream? Do you think you're alive?” Devil's advocate: being personally previously traumatized by various events does make them perfect candidates for MKUltra programming. But just because you're vulnerable doesn't mean someone will take advantage of you. It just means they can. It's important to protect yourself, they reinforce throughout their discography, espousing the importance of consent, a sense of self-worth and a fundamental sense of identity. Map of the Soul: 7 is, in one word, about identity, and focuses heavily on the 'Ego' part of Jungian philosophy and the importance of developing a healthy ego (positive life experiences, identity, world-view, dignity, self-worth and purpose.) While they haven't endorsed a certain political idea, their beliefs shine starkly through their lyrics and messages: criticism and skepticism of heavy government control, advocacy for free speech ('Speak Yourself'), amity and civility between people even if they disagree (bipartisan unity) and a distaste for violence. It's pretty accurate to say they believe people should be able to be and believe anything they want, without harming others. These values, along with their humility, love and kindness, endear them to fans all around the world. But be not distracted by my own heavily politically-focused coverage of the group. This is just where they stand on the issues, and they don't go around screaming their political stances to the world 24/7, either. If no one asks and it's not relevant to current events, one might deduce that on any given day the seven are simply a bunch of often-goofy bros who really like singing and dancing and rapping and making music. While that may be not as important and pertinent to world events, one would be amiss to say that this isn't a large part of why they are so popular.

Written by Amianon.

@amianon@counter.fedi.live

This article is part one in a series by guest contributor Amianon, focusing on the societal impact of the K-Pop boy band and worldwide sensation BTS.

So BTS references MKUltra in their work? You bet they do. For the award-winning septet, MKUltra slavery and the techniques one uses to enslave serves mainly as a metaphor for the dark side of fame and the psychological toll it takes to be in an industry that requires a high level of visibility and thus, one must either get comfortable feeling very naked before an audience or formulate some kind of persona to protect themselves. BTS have tried to strike a balance between the two. They're very, if almost intimately, acquainted with MKUltra programming techniques. Their work is laced with its symbolism. Did they extensively study it in order to strike a complicated, intricate parallel (and silently critique the entire structure of the Korean music industry) or do they actually have experience being beta kitten slaves? I tend to think it's the former. One ought to employ Occam's Razor. Hollywood is an entire industry dedicated to training people to put on personas. It's common thespian work: it's called acting. It doesn't have to have any negative implications. Where the negative/sinister implications do come in are when it's implied anyone (we'll call them Subject A) has such a traumatizing and emotionally, mentally and spiritually draining job or experience that it is necessary for them to actually disassociate themselves from what's happening to them/around them/to them so that they can maintain some semblance of sanity. The MKUltra theory is that you take the broken pieces of the person's mind and utilize each shattered piece separately, instead of gluing everything back together. (BTS only aims to heal and reconcile what might have been broken, instead of breaking anything further; in this way their art is therapeutic instead of divisive.) This is a method of employing the method of individuation (a Jungian psychological technique). One might separate them out and train each disassociated part to perform a certain purpose. One segment, when triggered, will elicit a bouncy, artificially happy Subject A. Another will bring to the forefront Subject A's dancing or multilingual skills. A 'glitch' might cause Subject A to stammer 'Good morning, Sunday morning'. Subject A may wear various faces or all of them at once to get through the day and convince themself they're doing just fine. Not every Subject A was originally broken; some are broken in on purpose in order to weaponize them. So is this necessary for titan group BTS? Probably not. Being a kpop-idol-type star is overwhelming and draining, but BigHit has always prioritized their artists' mental, physical and emotional health, providing them with 24/7 access to a spectrum of therapists and going so far as to cancel concerts due to an injury that might be easy to power through on powerful drugs or (in a rare case early-on, canceling an event because one of the artists had severe stage fright). Beyond the typical 'Staff treats BTS like kings' compilation videos on YouTube, the company has receipts. In 2019 they famously risked their financial security to give the seven members a month-long break and unlimited funds to go anywhere or fly anywhere they wanted in the world and do anything they wanted; the permission to joyride and let loose with black cards and no restrictions was just what the young twenty-somethings needed. They'd hit a wall and couldn't go any further. Jimin decided to party in Russia and get hilariously drunk in a nightclub in France (an anecdote that's captured on video on YouTube, uploaded by a stranger) and then fly twelve hours back to Korea to visit member Jungkook to celebrate the last two hours of his birthday with him and Hoseok, bearing expensive gifts and a flamboyant rainbow cake back with him. It's a horrifying tale; a world-famous musician traversing around with no security detail and unlimited freedom and money and letting strangers record him in an unfiltered, inebriated state; the gossip magazines would have a field day. BigHit pretended they Did Not See and probably had staff text him a reminder to take his hangover medicine. In contrast, the average kpop artist has only a few days off work a year. Not all members were as wild; some went to art museums, the weebs played games and watched anime and binged on junk food, some went fishing, their 'maknae' spent all of his time in the gym. It's doubtful the BTS members feel stifled or overwhelmed by their workload; sure they have grueling days, but they get ample off time, as well. And they've always had a hand in self-producing and working on the music and essentially enjoy free rein over their subject matter. So is it necessary to employ them as MKUltra slaves because they simply suffer from oppressive tyranny too much to be functional? Again, likely not. It's lucrative to treat your artists well, as BigHit has discovered; after their month-long break they came back with a platinum-certified album, the first South Korean album to achieve such a rating. Then why have they been referencing MKUltra's techniques so much recently? Specifically in WINGS, I believe they do it as a metaphor, being particularly fond of powerful symbolism. They're saying 'this is' (whether entangled in temptation or trapped in someone else's idea of what they should be) 'is as bad as not literally having my freedom.' BTS first touched on hints of the dull, lifeless feeling of being a puppet and a shell in WINGS (2016) but it was a vague foreshadowing of their more current Map of the Soul: 7 Jungian analysis. WINGS is BTS' most controversial era and is heavily queer-coded; the title track (Blood, Sweat and Tears) is disputably about gay BDSM and its choreography remains the most sensual BTS has ever performed to date. The album covers a multitude of thinly veiled topics such as temptation (both sexual and monetary), wasted youth, childhood trauma, internalized homophobia, loneliness at being an outcast/different, confusion and pain after realizing you are different, the struggle/desire to please others, identity, and solidarity. Track titles include, 'Boy Meets Evil' 'Stigma', 'Lost', 'Am I Wrong', 'Lie', and 'Reflection.'. If WINGS was without this heavy subtext, it might easily be construed as an offering up oneself to be a puppet and controlled, if only it might make the internal turmoil stop. Sounds familiar, doesn't it? But Hoseok (J-hope) hearkens back to his childhood and his one constant, his mother, in track, 'MAMA', summoning a Protestan Korean church choir onstage at the end of his performance on tour. While they may be struggling with particular sins, they haven't forgotten their roots. J-hope's raw delivery of the climaxing lines, 'What is higher than anything above the ground/what is wider than anything beneath the sky/I want to be held in your arms./You are forever my placebo, mother's hands are medicine hands./I love you, mom,' is a tearjerker for any ARMY. WINGS is a beautifully layered, startlingly honest emotional rollercoaster. It's one of BTS' most brutally sincere and direct albums to date. Taehyung sings despairingly in 'Stigma', “Are you calling me a sinner? Please let me be punished. Please forgive me for my sins”, Jimin cries out in 'Lie': “Find the me when I was pure,” and Namjoon gravely intones, “He, too, was a tempter, a link to the evil world with which I no longer wanted anything to do with.” The album's story winds down by settling on the idea that while relationships are to be treasured, self-introspection and challenging yourself on uncomfortable ideas yields maturity and personal growth. It's perhaps fitting; life does not resolve itself all at once and some people may struggle with things for a while. Jimin and Jungkook sing in 'LOST', 'I never felt this way before/am I becoming an adult?/this is too hard, is this the right path for me?/I'm confused.' Jin replies, 'There must be a reason for all this frustration/I do believe we're on the right path.' Jungkook continues: 'I went on the road I was told not to go/I did the things I was told not to do/I wanted things I shouldn't want/I got hurt and hurt again/You can call me stupid/and I'll just smile'; transitioning to Yoongi's line, 'But I believe in myself/I know my back is hurting because my wings are coming out.' So is WINGS about MKUltra slavery? Not really; it's more about growing up and venturing out on your own and having to make your own decisions—essentially a coming-of-age story. But Namjoon reminds that choices have consequences in 2!3!: 'Saying you will only see good things from now on/saying you won't get hurt/I can't tell you that/I can't lie like that.' The idea is to lean on those who love you for help. Ending track, 'A Supplementary Story: You Never Walk Alone' (the extended play of the album is retitled 'You Never Walk Alone) begins out by saying, 'Hey, why does God always make us feel lonely?/Yeah, even if we're covered in scars/we can smile if we're together.' The soloists entreat to those who may sympathize with their struggle but have come to a different conclusion: 'Even if it's the price I must pay for this life/will you walk with me/will you stay with me?' wrapping up the entire story arc with a powerful message: you can still disagree with someone and love them with all your heart. In the music video for 'Not Today' the members attempt to take bullets for each other, even if it means in the end they are all shot down. (Not Today is based after and in some parts quotes word-for-word a speech by Martin Luther King Jr. about resilience.) WINGS is an excellent example of the members' famous extraordinary tight bond and love for each other. “When I was fifteen years old, I had nothing,” Jungkook sings. “Love you my brother, now I've got brothers.” He reflects later on: “I feel like dying, when my brother is sad. When my brother is sick, it hurts more than when I'm sick./So I don't know much about sadness/but I'm going to cry with you anyway.”, hearkening back to biblical commands love those around you, weep with those who weep, and walk alongside them, even if they don't have it all figured out yet. So even if WINGS does have an entirely different premise the deeper one digs, it does lay the foundation for the lengthy discussion of identity and personas outlined in Map of Soul: 7. J-hope raps in 2!3! 'I didn't want to show you everything, including my pain/because I'm still unaccustomed/I just wanted to make you smile.' The members frequently tell their fans they wish to show them only the best of them and avoid burdening them with worries and in order to be the inspiration they always wanted someone else to be for them. Thus, they might, for the sake of conversation, employ a 'split', or just…act cheerful when on camera. The line between voluntarily acting and being controlled is drawn at autonomy. One must genuinely ask the question, 'Is Subject A being controlled?' and the 'yes' or 'no' will give you some idea of your answer.

In short, to the religious members of the team, being entangled in sin is as bad as being an MKUltra slave; for the secular, bowing to baseless societal expectations and stereotypes is like giving up your freedom to evil faceless puppet masters. Pick your POV.

Written by Amianon.

@amianon@counter.fedi.live

As we near two months of widespread violence across the country and no end in sight, the calls grow louder for things to come to a head, either for the insurgents to prevail, or for the violence to be squashed. While some consider and scrutinize possible solutions to the armed conflicts, most seem concerned with who to blame. Many of the right are blaming the local authorities for the violence, while those on the left lay the blame on President Trump. Does the blame belong completely on one side or the other? The answer might not be as simple as it seems.

It must first be considered that there are various approaches to violence currently being employed by Antifa, the leading violent insurrectionist group behind the violence which hasrecently been designated as a domestic terrorism organization by the current administration. Some Antifa members have destroyed statues, committed vandalism, and burned buildings. Others loot, and others commit violent attacks on American citizens, occasionally murdering them. Still others remain peaceful, but encourage the violence from the sidelines.

Some blame surely lies on the citizenry, why by and large did little to defend themselves from the attacks. While many have sought to buy guns, they did so at a time when it was too late, and much of the economy had already been crushed by overreactions to the Coronavirus, meaning a shortage of guns available to be sold in the first place. By then, of course, the violence had already begun.

Well, what about the next line of defense: law enforcement? Those sworn to serve and protect the citizens? Well, these organizations have generally been deliberately hamstrung, both by local, elected officials, and bad PR, which forced officers to fall back in order to not lose trust in the community. Of course, the point has been raised that law enforcement should ignore orders that leave the citizens unprotected for the sake of political points, but the fact remains that the higher-ups in the organization are issuing these orders, keeping law enforcement from, well, enforcing the law, and even worse, pardoning and freeing the traitorous terrorists once they are in custody.

In other cases, law enforcement has been attempting to hold the mobs at bay by firing tear gas, pepper spray, firecrackers, and other repellants, but these cases are diminishing as it generates bad press for law enforcement as a whole, and the terrorists either attempt to overrun law enforcement, or leave only to return another day.

Of course, above them are the elected local officials, which have a hand in hiring those on charge with the local police departments. What blame do they bear for the violence? Many who tell their officers to fall back or stand down are clearly signaling their support for the violence of the terrorists, at times appeasing them by painting political messages on the road. Calling for peace while not instructing law enforcement to keep it rings hollow. Since they oversee local police departments, they do bear some of the blame for their failure to defend the citizens. However, the be fair, much of the blame for them even being in office in the first place lies directly in the hands of their constituents, for failing to elect leaders who will keep them safe. Worse still is the fact that countless citizens who will doubtlessly vote to retain the same politicians who are currently endangering them and exposing them to violent mobs.

Higher upon the power ladder is the current federal administration itself. How much blame does President Trump hold for the violence? The answer will largely depend on your opinion of the role of the federal government in keeping the peace on local land. If one is of the opinion that it is the federal government’s job to keep the peace in states if they fail to ensure law and order, then the answer is largely no. However, for those who believe that the government should be intervening, the answer is clearly yes, as the federal government has largely been absent from state jurisdictions. Regardless of where one stands on this, the Trump administration should bear full responsibility for any lack of action to stem violence on federal land. The property belongs to the federal government, thus, it is the federal government’s job to keep the terrorists in check. While President Trump has repeatedly called for an end to the violent riots, as with the local officials, mere words are not enough to allay blame for violence.

There is plenty of blame to go around. No one particular group or person shares all the guilt. While it is more constructive to consider possible solutions than possible culprits, so long as people are looking for someone to blame, it is best to make sure one is blaming the truly guilty parties.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@gameliberty.club

@realcaseyrollins@kafuka.me

Motorola G Fast official announcement video

This morning, Motorola unexpectedly announced their latest smartphone, the Motorola G Fast. Joining the Moto G Power and the Moto G Stylus, the Moto G Fast seems quite similar to the Moto G Stylus, boasting a similar (if slightly larger) 5,000 mAh battery set to last for two days and an identical 1080 by 2300 display. However, it comes with 64 GB of storage, rather than the 128 GB that can be found on the Stylus, and it has 3 GB of RAM rather than 4.

We know a bit about this phone, but there are some unknowns here as well. We don't currently know which processor the Moto G Fast will launch with, although Motorola claims it will be “blazing fast” and its Snapdragon chip is octa-core. Motorola also says it has several camera modes, including Macro Vision and Ultra-Wide, but we still don't know the specs of this new device's camera. Among other unknowns are water resistance, the launch market, and the price, but it's reasonable to expect that we could see further announcements soon on those fronts.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@gameliberty.club

@realcaseyrollins@mstdn.social

This review covers only the two-episode premiere.

When FX announced three new series—Devs, Dave, and Breeders—I assumed that Dave was created to fill Atlanta’s spot of sharp social commentary, while Breeders would just be the fun new comedy. However, it appears that the inverse is true.

Breeders is a very tense and dark psychological dramedy. The program is largely one-note; the kids drive the parents crazy. The writing is sharp, especially for the dialogue, and the acting is top-notch, even if side plots don’t feel integrated into the larger story. As an artistic work, Breeders is high quality entertainment. It feels effortlessly funny a times, which is good in an era of shows that are trying too hard.

Where I find issues in Breeders is in the messaging it perpetuates. The one-noteness of the program is largely due to the majority of each episode consisting of the main characters’ children driving them crazy. They aren’t just inconsiderate, as one might expect, they’re also downright manipulative of Paul and Ally (the main couple)’s parenting style. Never once are the children ever disciplined. The closest thing to discipline that the children experience is a string of f-words screamed from the mouth of their father, which I would guess as the show goes on will prove to be more mentally scarring than actually corrective of their behavior. If the kids grow up to be brats, it could be quite reasonable to blame the parents (imagine that!).

However, the crux of my main gripe with the show is in its portrayal of the children. Children can be terrible, grubby little monsters, and Breeders portrays this aspect of little ones quite masterfully. However, they're not portrayed as much else. If the children aren’t terrorizing the parents, they’re sleeping, and that’s only so that they can wake the parents up in the middle of the night (again). Completely ignored is the cuteness of children, and their sweet, charming antics. Never do the children ever bring joy to their parents. It easily leads the viewer of 40 straight minutes of torture to ask “well, why would anyone even want to have children at all?” Especially one who has never had children or spent much time with them.

While the show strongly suggests you ask this question, it doesn’t make the slightest attempt to answer it, leaving the viewer to watch on hopelessly as the parents continue to be tortured. Perhaps this question will be answered later on in the program. The children are quite young, so there is plenty of room for the show to grow, and many directions the show can take. And as I write this, episode two is already out, although if the thumbnail and episode name of the third episode are any indication, not much is set to change in Breeders’ messaging, at least not yet.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@gameliberty.club

@realcaseyrollins@mstdn.social

@thecaseyrollins on Twitter

This is an edited version of the transcript for Counter Points Media's video 'The Cost Of Cancel Culture' The information might be old or outdated, and the author might not hold the same opinion today.

The Cost Of Cancel Culture (on BitChute)

The Cost Of Cancel Culture (on YouTube)

Before we begin, this message is necessary for context.

Under no circumstance should anyone ever harass anyone for their opinion or use of free speech.

Additionally, under no circumstance should anyone, even a black person, use the n word.

I am using the names of the persons involved, since by now this information is already public and viral.

Please do not harass them in any way.

A case has been made by some that this is harassment, or doxxing, and legal charges could be in order. I will leave a link below so that you can explore the information regarding this if your wish.

If any of the persons involved in this video would like to contact me for any reason, please message me.

My Twitter handle is @thecaseyrollins, and on both Qoto and mstdn.social my handle is @realcaseyrollins.

2020 is finally upon us, and while many are excited to enter the new year, for two young teenagers, the new decade couldn’t have started on a worse note.

The controversy began two days before the dawn of 2020, when Bailee Beckett and her friend Bethany Bonar were hanging out. Bailee is white, and Bethany is black. The issues began when Bailee posted a selfie with Bethany, saying she was her white friend, and stating that she doesn’t hang out with n words. When another user, who previously went by the name Oli but now goes by Iris Hera on Twitter, recorded a direct Snapchat message created by the both of them, clarifying that Bethany had given her permission to use the n word, and explaining why, in her eyes, it was fine to use.

While the case can certainly be made that no one should be using the n word, and while it has a massive, looming history of being used to oppress African Americans, and not all black people are comfortable with white people using the n word, Bethany’s main point is right. Bethany is fine with the message in the video, and the message was shared in a private context.

However, this was not enough for Iris Hera, who took it upon herself to post their entire exchange publically on Twitter, exposing their names to her followers, leading many to slander them and call for major companies to never hire them, and for colleges to not accept them.

Bailee responded with two videos, asking Oli to take the posts down, claiming that this could ruin her life, and accusing her of harassment.

Bailee went on to reveal that her mother also wanted Oli to delete the videos.

The exchange prompted a flurry of responses, such as condemning Bethany for being an oreo, or condemning Bailee of being racist.

This, of course, is unfortunately a sign of the next generation. Raised up with figures such as Kolin Kaepernick, Jussie Smollett, and LeBron James as role models, it should be no surprise that Oli decided to immediately post the info online, is gloating over her newfound clout, and is considering making a merch line with her girlfriend. The term “social justice warrior” might be overused, but the fact is that SJWs are some of the most highly praised personalities in modern pop culture. Marry this with Cancel Culture, and the Tik Tok Generation has become a ticking time bomb, rife with infighting and just waiting for something to spark an explosion. Many in politics today are warning that there’s impending civil war. In reality, it might be necessary to merely wait for the 15 year olds to become adults.

While calling out actual racism is a noble thing to do, to point out a single mistake made early in someone’s life as something that should end any hope of them being successful, especially for a one-time use of a bad word, is anything but, and the support Oli has received is troubling.

Humans were created as flawed creatures. To demand that they be perfect and never make a mistake is certainly unreasonable. What is reasonable is to allow teens to grow up and learn from their own mistakes how to operate in the real world. After all, all of us are mere works in progress.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@qoto.org

@realcaseyrollins@mstdn.social

@thecaseyrollins on Twitter

This is an edited version of the transcript for Counter Points Media's video 'Our Modern Dystopia' The information might be old or outdated, and the author might not hold the same opinion today.

Our Modern Dystopia

Our Modern Dystopia

I have been following censorship for around three years now, and it is a subject that has always fascinated me. Not because I saw overt threats to free speech at the time, but because of the vast powers big tech holds. I didn't understand the world of censorship in my sophomore year in high school as well as I do now, but I knew enough to see that it was only a matter of time before a company that controls the top browser, runs the most popular entertainment website, and holds the keys to the entire internet would begin to abuse its power, and this revelation is no more clear than in our present, near-dystopian digital age.

YouTubers have long been complaining about demonetization of videos due to language or edgy political views, but as of late the conversation has been louder, and the punishment harsher. For instance, soph, a 14-year-old satirist whose content comes across as a cross between a political version of Studio C and an intellectual PewDiePie, recently got targeted by BuzzFeed for supposedly using hate speech in her video do not be afraid. The part BuzzFeed, and the other NPC-like mainstream blogs and outlets took the most umbrage with was her saying “isalamalakem” and referring to the middle-aged Muslim men who marry very young girls and rape them. BuzzFeed merely had to shout “sick em boy” for YouTube to take the video down. However they likely were not expecting the outpouring of support she received from the alt-right, many of them undoubtedly duped into believing that she was actually racist, similar to how the fake news media on the left gaslighted hateful groups like the KKK into supporting Trump, on the merit that he was racist too. Ironically, YouTube bowing to the wishes of a hateful fake news blog amplified the accused, and helped her inch ever closer to the coveted 1 million subscriber mark. It was rumored that YouTube would remove her channel after completely demonetizing it, but thought better of it after seeing all the support she recieved for being bullied by two large, left-wing establishment groups.

Even more recently, Steven Crowder, the host of Louder with Crowder, which essential serves as the right-wing’s Late Show with Steven Colbert, was targeted by Carlos Maza, a gay guy who hosts the cringeworthy, anger-fueled left-wing video series on Vox’s YouTube channel called Strikethrough, for supposedly harrasing him for being gay. And later, he added that it was for being Mexican too. He cites times that Crowder debunks the pervasive errors in his NBC-funded YouTube videos, and describes him using so-called “homophobic” as well as racial slurs; the irony here is, Maza’s own Twitter handle is the word “gay” paired up with an apparently racial slur. It is hard to take one seriously when they become angry with someone for describing them the exact same way that they portray themselves on the outset. In a sane world, these claims would be met with the same mockery and scorn as one who calls the cops on someone for calling them ma’am, even though she introduced herself as such. Even YouTube, while investigating the particular clips Maza presented in his raging Tweets, found that Crowder had done nothing wrong in the videos, although in an effort to placate the emotional gay man during Pride Week claimed that they are investigating aspects of Steven Crowder’s YouTube channel. That investigation ended with YouTube demonetizing his channel for sells a shirt featuring the word figs.

I bring all this up to say that rather than going away, censorship is reaching a fever pitch that is destined to burn hotter than 451 degrees fahrenheit. In fact, at the University in which I am currently enrolled, Albert Mohler, famed anchor of the Christian-themed news and culture podcast “Daily Breifing”, was invited on campus for numerous speaking events, one of them being a town hall. I used that opportunity to ask a question regarding free speech online, citing instances such as FaceBook blocking ads for pro-life causes and Twitch banning the non-political streamer HelenaLive for mentioning that there are only two genders. In his response, he predicted that there will come a time when Christians won’t be allowed to use the internet at all. While it sounds like an outlandish dystopian nightmare, it’s not an impossible reality, and most importantly, it’s the one we are creeping closer and closer towards. As we approach the end of free speech on the highways of the internet, it’s important to know how to navigate the underground railroad and arrive at websites and digital solutions that allow you to express yourself freely.

Thankfully, these havens of freedom aren’t all that difficult to use. I recommend watching videos by The Hated One for better and more detailed instructions, but one can easily evade big tech almost completely. Using Linux can help keep Microsoft from analyzing your activity, which you may find in your interest, as it’s been rumored for nearly two decades that they’ve installed backdoors into Windows for the NSA’s use. Simpler solutions consist of switching away from Chrome or browsers that use unmodified versions of Google’s Chromium engine, to an alternative such as Firefox, Dissenter, or even Opera. The next step is to find alternatives to the websites one typically uses, preferably one with high-profile users. Some nice alternatives to YouTube and Twitch are BitChute and DLive, as BitChute content from users such as soph, Infowars, styxhexenhammer666, Timcast and 1791, and DLive has attracted PewDiePie to their platform. Nice alternatives to FaceBook and Twitter are Gab and Minds, both of which also have popular internet personalities. Furthermore, the browser Tor is exceptional at evading network-wide censorship measures, as well as hiding the ability of third parties to track your network usage. With the abundance of alternative websites and free independent software currently available, you can find respite from the leftist, zombie-like trolls; always feasting on the flesh of those different than them, and yet somehow never tired and never satisfied.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@qoto.org

@realcaseyrollins@civiq.social

@thecaseyrollins on Twitter

This is an edited version of the transcript for Counter Points Media's video '#SOPHGATE' The information might be old or outdated, and the author might not hold the same opinion today.

#SOPHGATE

#SOPHGATE

It’s been known to many that YouTube takes somewhat sadistic pleasure in muting the voices of those who hold extreme points of view, any in a move that should shock absolutely no one, YouTube just banned soph, a budding satirist and top alt-right commentator. Satirically commenting on various trends in modern culture, the majority of her content consists of mocking the far left and pointing out instances of violence that often occurs among the left’s protected class. Her account is still available on BitChute, so her content is still online, but that hardly negates the fact that YouTube should technically be legally bound to support all points of view, as they are classified as being a platform rather than a publisher, and receive benefits by doing so.

This is exactly why it is important to use alt-tech now, before you are banned. A user like soph, who understands the controversial nature of her content, will be sure to back it up on a website like BitChute. But by the time you realize that you’re next, it will be too late, and your content could disappear from the internet quicker than a dusted character in Avengers: Infinity War.

This is an edited version of the transcript for Counter Points Media's video 'What Espanol in MSNBC Debates Reveal About Democrats.' The information might be old or outdated, and the author might not hold the same opinion today.

What Espanol in MSNBC Debates Reveal About Democrats

What Espanol in MSNBC Debates Reveal About Democrats

During the first MSNBC Democrat debate, at first glance it may seem that nothing of note occurred besides the mainstream media ignoring the only clear winner, Tulsi Gabbard. Few policy differences were exposed, but what was exposed shows something deeply troubling about the soul of the Democratic party.

On social media, Beto, Booker, and Castro were roundly mocked for their use of Spanish during the debate. The fact that Democrat candidates would even bother to answer multiple questions in Spanish was viewed by many as merely an act of pandering, and they’re right. Answering questions given in English in Spanish serves little purpose unless the debate had been translated during the telecast and the candidates didn’t want to be mis-interpreted.

Nevertheless, the case remains that candidates use opportunities like debates to speak to their voters, revealing that these Democrats view a sizeable and growing portion of their electorate as hispanic, many of them presumably illegal immigrants. The policies discussed revealed that they want to further change the demographic makeup of the country, allowing unrestrained immigration into the country under the guise of compassion, although that’s not the real motive as evidence by the fact that no matter how hard he tried, Julian Castro could not summon even a single fake tear over a tragic border incident. In reality, they’re importing voters, offering bribes to starving hordes in exchange for merely a vote. When put in line with the fact that all the candidates ignored the very real plight of many white Americans, alongside the cultish levels of support for Planned Parenthood, a child sacrifice temple originally called The Negro Project, reveals that Democrats view the electorate merely on the color of their skin.

According to them, whites are divided but incredibly stubborn, making it worthless to pursue whites on the other end of the aisle. Blacks are growingly insurrectionist and ideologically unstable, from Black Lives Matter to Blexit, making them unreliable voters. Hispanics, meanwhile, are poor and destitute, in need of a better life, which the Democrats can use to exchange votes for daily bread.

This unbelievably racist mentality of the modern Democrat party shows just how “caring and compassionate” they actually are. By inventing new so-called civil rights for sexual degenerates and those drowning in debt, among others, they whitewash the tombs, making themselves appear compassionate, but once you examine them closer, the repelling stench of hatred and deception easily wafts into your mental nostrils.

This is an edited version of the transcript for Counter Points Media's video 'The Truth About Gab.' The information might be old or outdated, and the author might not hold the same opinion today.

The Truth About Gab on BitChute

The Truth About Gab on YouTube

Gab.ai has been around since August 2016, and was launched publicly in May 2017. However, you may not have heard much about it until October 2018, when a Gab user committed a mass shooting in a Pittsburg synagogue. As usual, the typical left-wing fake news reporting rushed to blame guns for the shooting, but when they wanted to take a break from that, they began blaming Gab, forever tarnishing its reputation and filling search engine results with unbased slander against the site. Why? There’s a quick and simple answer, but a long story, so it’s best to start at the beginning.

Gab was originally launched as a free speech competitor to Twitter. After harsher and harsher censorship rules imposed by Twitter, Andrew Torba created Gab as a free-speech Twitter clone. The interface and methods of interaction were similar. There are hashtags, topics, @ symbols for mentioning certain users, and so on. But there were differences too, like the inclusion of groups, as well as, you guessed it, protections for free speech. According to their current Community Guidelines, Gab allows all speech that is legal under the United States’ First Amendment, which protects free speech. The only content not allowed on the site is piracy, threats of violence or terrorism, illegal pornography, and using Gab for the illegal sale of various products and services. Their policies for account management is similar to Twitter’s, however, banning spam accounts, duplicate accounts and account squatting. Gab’s policy on content, meanwhile, seems to be “if it’s legal, it’s fine.” This is in stark contrast to Twitter, which bans content that is racist, so-called “homophobic”, or just supposedly “hateful”.

When the site launched, Andrew Torba made an announcement on the blog site Medium, and the tech blog Wired rushed to condemn the site, calling it “alt right”, which flies in the face of a direct quote from Torba where he said “we want everyone” and “if there are any centrists, progressives, libertarians, or apolitical people interested in trying something new, I say, please join us.” Of course, Torba (who hold multiple online accounts using the name of Gab), eventually got banned from Medium.

However, coverage of Gab since its launch was few and far between, except for when their apps were blocked by Apple and Google’s app stores because of “hate speech.” Things were relatively peaceful, until one dramatic moment that would change everything for Gab, forever.

A Gab user shot people. While Gab never condoned the attack, and never directly supported the shooter or his ideology, many blamed Gab for inspiring his hate. While odd, this is quite typical of the over-tolerant left. In the leftist’s often psychotic mind, if one does not support a message or idea, they do whatever they can to silence the opposition. If you don’t like conservatives, you ban them. If you don’t like Christian bakers you put them in jail. If you don’t support Nazis, you punch them.

This line of thinking leads the leftist to believe racism is far more widespread than it actually is; it sees a lack of virtue signalling as a clear case of racism that must not be tolerated. However, one underlying factor in the case of Gab is that they are doing nothing wrong. They simply host a website where people can post stuff. They aren’t breaking the law, so the only way to take them on is through tarnishing their reputation. So, the lamestream media barrages Gab with slander whenever they cover it. This is one reason why Gab is viewed as alt-right.

However, there is another major factor at play: the vast majority of Gab’s users are alt-right, and racist. At first, this seems to validate claims that Gab is an alt-right website, designed for racist white Nazis. (Okay, black ones too, but I’m not going over that today.) It’s true that most of Gab’s users are racist; however, this is not due to Gab’s prioritizing certain views over another, nor rules banning anti-racist speech, but two major factors; the first is that the first users to switch to Gab were mostly people who had been banned from Twitter for racist or incendiary speech. The disproportionate and discriminatory nature of Twitter’s bans and censorship have led most of the Twitter exiles to be people from the far-right. Ironically, the far left forces alt-right social media users off their site and drives them to Gab, and then blames Gab for having an alt-right userbase. Then, of course, their loud proclamation that Gab is racist dissuades non-racists from joining the website and condemning the hatred, leaving the alt-right and racism as the predominant voices on the website. Obviously Gab isn’t an alt-right site, designed for neo-Nazis, like the media says they are. Rather, it serves as a haven for free speech and freedom of expression. Several progressives have joined the website, after all. But the media focuses only on the fact that the alt-right can use the site without being afraid of getting banned. That is the reason they are attacked, because in the end, some people want only their voices and perspectives to be heard.

Written by Casey Rollins.

@realcaseyrollins@qoto.org

@realcaseyrollins@civiq.social

@thecaseyrollins on Twitter