#FreeStacy

Via Vox Day and Instapundit, the social justice warriors at Twitter have suspended Robert Stacy McCain’s account without explanation.

Related, and also via Vox:

Mike Cernovich has launched the Kickstarter for his documentary Silenced: Our War on Free Speech:

This entry was posted in Linkage, Robert Stacy McCain, Social Justice Warriors, Vox Day. Bookmark the permalink.

41 Responses to #FreeStacy

  1. okrahead says:

    Ironically enough, however, Brett Kimberlin’s Twitter is still active.

  2. Pingback: #FreeStacy – Manosphere.com

  3. feeriker says:

    Repeat after me, again and again: “grown men don’t Tweet.”

  4. Boxer says:

    Thanks for posting this Mr. D..

    Ironically enough, however, Brett Kimberlin’s Twitter is still active.

    As is mine. Almost everyone on mpc still has theirs.

    They seem to be going after the more serious people first: Chuck Johnson got the axe a few months ago.

    (Note, I don’t agree with much of what RSM talks about on his blog and elsewhere, but banning him merely for disagreeing with Anita Sarkeesian is reprehensible.)

    Boxer

  5. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    It’s quite amusing watching people like McCain, Vox, and Cernovich complain about Twitter censorship, since they themselves regularly censor and ban fellow Alt-Righters from commenting at their websites.

    Too funny.

  6. Boxer says:

    since they themselves regularly censor and ban fellow Alt-Righters from commenting at their websites.

    Such people don’t have a history of describing their private blogs as “public utilities,” as near as I can tell.

    http://searchengineland.com/twitter-as-utility-like-running-water-thats-goal-says-ceo-64803

    Boxer

  7. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    The hypocrisy is undeniable. You can’t make this stuff up.

  8. Joel P. says:

    “It’s quite amusing watching people like McCain, Vox, and Cernovich complain about Twitter censorship”

    Somebody’s butthurt.

    You’re a liar as well. You know full well Vox has a very lenient comment policy. If he banned you (which is obviously the case given your butthurt), you almost certainly did something to deserve it. Stop bitching.

  9. Opus says:

    Twitter is just too dangerous: in one hundred and forty characters and frequently less, then unless you have great wit, you are reduced to bluntness which far too frequently, where I am – no first amendment – has led to prosecution and terms of imprisonment for the hapless. I deactivated my account some years ago as did, this week, top Luvvie-tweeter Stephen Fry (well, he’s famous in England) – petulance by him over the fact that an off-the-cuff joke he made at the BAFTAs (The English Oscars) failed the test of politically incorrectness – something about Bag Ladies.

    As Heartiste rightly says, Facebook is for telling pretty lies to your friends, Twitter for telling unpalatable truths to strangers.

  10. I thought this was America.

  11. Anonymous Reader says:

    While this should not be a surprise, given the creation of the “trust” commissariate featuring feminist orgs and recently the addition of Sarkeesian, I admit that I did not expect the SJW’s that have taken over Twitter to move so soon. Frankly I expected them to not get into banning or shadowbanning until the summer, in support of shaping the election landscape.

    Three thoughts:
    1. This is what happens when lefties such as the SJW’s are allowed into an organization. Because the left for years has been intolerant of dissent (See: any college campus), and the SJW’s are positively in fear of dissent. See the visit by Milo to an Ivy (Brown?) where students demanded counselling for the trauma of sharing a campus with him. The Millennial SJW’s are like tiny china dolls, they are so fragile and easily triggered…
    2. A market niche now exists for short messaging along channels via subscription (the Twitter model) since Twitter cannot be trusted anymore, having become a politicalized institution. I bet that there are people working on this even now. Expect this to beecome a trend, in view of what happened at Mozilla to Eich – parallel orgs / channels must be created, and must be kept free of SJW’s (see 1 above).
    3. Note to self: buy puts on Twitter, long expiriation (6 months or more).

  12. Anonymous Reader says:

    Oh, and this fits in with Facebook cooperating with the German government to shut down any dissent over the colonists from the Middle East, and also fits in with the arrest of a man in Scotland for criticizing colonizers too harshly, again on Facebook.

    The SJW’s only support free speech for themselves and their friends – rather like most of the Left across the entire 20th century, but…that’s a different rabbit trail.

  13. Chris says:

    Manosphere may be private, but there is no shortage of censorship for opposing opinions. If fear fuels censorship, what are the writers of Manosphere afraid of?

  14. Boxer says:

    Manosphere may be private, but there is no shortage of censorship for opposing opinions. If fear fuels censorship, what are the writers of Manosphere afraid of?

    To support this thesis, you’d have to have WordPress or Blogspot banning some authors from starting blogs. That’s basically what twitter is doing.

    You may be banned from individual blogs, but those blogs are built and maintained by one dude for the purpose of his own expression. If you are banned from Vox or Cernovich blogs, you can start your own blog on the same service and talk back to them. If you are banned on twitter, you are silenced. There’s the major difference.

  15. eidolon1109 says:

    The equivalent would be if Blogger and WordPress hired Vox to an overseer role, and he started making it so every SJW blogger in a leadership position’s blog suddenly became private and their comments on other sites stopped showing up for other people. Come back when you find an example of this ever happening anywhere. And then, even if you eventually do (and I don’t think you will), we still won’t care, because they did it first and our side would just be responding to aggression with the same tactics.

  16. Eidolon says:

    The equivalent would be if Blogger and WordPress hired Vox to an overseer role, and he started making it so every SJW blogger in a leadership position’s blog suddenly became private and their comments on other sites stopped showing up for other people. Come back when you find an example of this ever happening anywhere. And then, even if you eventually do (and I don’t think you will), we still won’t care, because they did it first and our side would just be responding to aggression with the same tactics.

  17. Yoda says:

    The “Moral Equivalence Brigade” obviously standing at the ready they are

  18. Eidolon says:

    Is it so hard to understand that individual blogs banning commenters from their own sites is a totally different thing than colluding with the people who run the platform to make other people’s opinions disappear from the platform entirely?

  19. Comments lamenting the twitter fate of a self described conservative with only Boxer objecting to the positions of said conservative?

  20. Yoda says:

    People who use moral equivalence differentiate between one orange and a bushel of apples typically they cannot.
    Makes one wonder how they feed themselves it does

  21. Eidolon says:

    @empath

    Well, if they’re censoring RSM, presumably anyone further to the right would be totally beyond the pale, so it’s a problem for everyone on the right.

    RSM’s views are a bit quaint. He sees some of the issues, but he’s blind to many others. He reminds me of the comlementarians Dalrock’s been talking about to some extent. I think he’s pretty set in stone, and I don’t think he can process the reality of the fact that “conservatism” isn’t going to fix any of the problems he’s identified (see his odd reaction to the “cuckservative” meme).

    I think he’s doing great work investigating the reality of feminist theory, but at the same time I wonder if he’s giving it entirely too much credit by taking it seriously.

  22. Gurney Halleck says:

    Dalrock, check out this Rod Dreher post on “saving marriage”:

    http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/arguing-for-marriage/

    Dreher relates that he’s been counseling his female friend through some relationship difficulty — you see, she wants to leave her long term relationship, but it’s really hard because she and her boyfriend’s finances are entangled and they aren’t married. Dreher says that things would be really more simple for his friend (in order to more comfortably and easily end her relationship without complications) if she and the man were legally married!

    Dreher holds this as a positive aspect of legal marriage!

    Maybe I’m misreading him but I think the post is indicative of SoCon delusions.

  23. >>>”if she and the guy were married. The law would be on her side, or at least make sure she got a fair cut of what they built together. But they aren’t married, and now she’s at his mercy.”

    Dreher makes the strongest MGTOW advertisement against marriage yet seen and he does it while “Arguing For Marriage.”

  24. Fred Flange, der kommissar says:

    Milo spoke at Rutgers. Not an Ivy school though it’s so old people think it is. Yes, sadly, some poor Omega whined that the school was not interested in his mental health because Milo was allowed to speak. Embarrassing.
    That said, he did speak, he had fans in the audience, and the Targum coverage was reasonably fair.

  25. Pingback: #FreeStacy | Reaction Times

  26. Robert What? says:

    McCain got blacklisted by the reverse McCarthyites?! (Only communists and communist sympathisers need apply.) I’m shutting down my Twitter account.

  27. Anonymous Reader says:

    Milo spoke at Rutgers. Not an Ivy school though it’s so old people think it is. Yes, sadly, some poor Omega whined that the school was not interested in his mental health because Milo was allowed to speak. Embarrassing.
    That said, he did speak, he had fans in the audience, and the Targum coverage was reasonably fair.

    Thanks for the clarification.

  28. Anon says:

    Laguna BF wrote :

    since they themselves regularly censor and ban fellow Alt-Righters from commenting at their websites.

    No they don’t. You have a track record as a violence-advocating racist, who nonetheless is too much of a coward to do anything yourself. Hence your wish for more ‘Breviks’ to do your dirty work (against even those who are law-abiding and here legally).

    Quotes from Laguna BF :

    “We’re going to need a lot more Breviks.”

    “God only knows how many Nationalist saviors like Brevik are patiently trolling the Interwebz as we speak.”

    No wonder everyone calls him ‘Laguna B*tch F*ggy’. I won’t partake in such vulgarity here, but the name is rather apt.

    The high quality of commenter dialog on this blog will plunge if the likes of LBF start to pollute this place.

  29. Anon says:

    JoelP,

    you almost certainly did something to deserve it. Stop bitching.

    Yes, he did. See those quotes of LBF that I linked.

    He is a huge fan of Anders Breivik, Dylan roof, etc. (since he wants others to do what his vision entails, at no risk to himself). He is then surprised that decent blogs ban him.

  30. Looking Glass says:

    @AR:

    The Insiders clearly established their short position on Twitter in April of last year. There’s a very clear construction of a Market Maker Model starting in late 2014. Though the range to get back short is around $21. I wouldn’t want to be establishing a positions below $20.

    But the problem with individual stocks is this: Somewhere between $5 and $7, Twitter is ripe for a buyout by Google or Facebook. This is actually one of those points where “synergy” would allow them to be net profitable for another company. At the cost of most of their staff. Cut out $100 million in salaries/benefits + all of the extraneous stock compensation and you have a profitable company.

    Which goes to a point about “why don’t conservatives make media companies”, I see crop up. Frankly, practically *all* of them are money losing endeavors. Unless you’re a “True Believer” in the your ideology, it’s a really stupid business to be in.

  31. The Question says:

    I think most of us saw this coming the day they made the announcement.
    https://anarchistnotebook.com/2016/02/09/announcing-the-commissariat-for-trust-and-safety/

    I’m sure someone will say “it’s a private company and they can do whatever they want with it. So there.” Mind you, these are the same people who think bakers and florists should be forced at the point of a gun to participate in activities they don’t approve of.

    You have the “right” to do exactly as you are supposed to.

  32. RICanuck says:

    @Gurney Halleck

    Rod Dreher’s female friend is looking for a replacement man. It might be Rod, or he might just be a beta orbiter. She is looking for or already has a replacement man.

    I don’t know why Mrs. Dreher tolerates that, unless she is also thinking of moving on.

    Swallowing the red pill induces a certain amount of cynicism, but it keeps me out of that sort of trouble.

  33. PokeSalad says:

    Unless you’re a “True Believer” in the your ideology, it’s a really stupid business to be in.

    Someone, might be Vox Day, had an interesting post on this sort of thing recently. Leftists aren’t afraid of money-losing media ventures because they are committed to the Narrative and are zealots for the message….Rightists are more worried about losing the money.

    I’ve always said that we suffer because we argue Principle, thinking it will lead to Power. Lefties know that you get Power first, by any means, then impose your Principle.

  34. Gunner Q says:

    Grown men don’t Tweet.

    I’m okay with censorship and dream of having my turn one day. There’s nothing like living in California’s cities to convince a guy that punishing people for their privately held beliefs can be a really good idea.

  35. elmertjones says:

    If I have said it one I have said it a million times : When an organization becomes feminized, focus shifts from the efficient production of goods and services to the creation of rules for the comfort and security of women. Ossification and organizational death are inevitable.

  36. Looking Glass says:

    @PokeSalad:

    Vox mentioned it, but it’s been understood for a while. I do have formal media training and there’s reasons those types collect together. It’s not by happenstance of location that they form collectives in certain ways.

    But the main differences are really 3 fold: God, Children and a lack of a desire for Power. The last is the key glue to the way those people operate. What they want is Power & Control of their own lives, which they lack because they don’t have the Lord. So they dive in way too far to whatever it is they’re doing, which can produce an immense amount of effort, but it’s, at its core, incredibly selfish. Not self-interested but actually selfish (or greedy) for that which they do not have.

    The issue is further compounded because, if you brought that point up to any of them, they simply do not have the self-reflection necessary to see it. That’s the problem when your “God” is yourself and that god is quite pathetic. (No one ever asks why they use so much drugs & alcohol if they’re supposedly our “betters”, do they?)

  37. Yoda says:

    When an organization becomes feminized, focus shifts from the efficient production of goods and services to the creation of rules for the comfort and security of women. Ossification and organizational death are inevitable.

    Happened with the Jedi this did.
    See the result you do

  38. Anita Sarkeesian owns the joint over there now, don’t offend her or you’re Twitter-Toast. It’s ok, Twitter-stock is toast anyway. But it is NOT a public utility, it is owned and now operated by a woman, see Yoda’s remark, above. A solid take, in a nutshell, exactly how it goes. An operational model for failure. It can happen with any blog, you crowd the owner, they ban you. Perhaps I’m about to be banned from here.

    See, Forney and Roosh ban if you question their stuff too. As an example, and I’m not grousing, that psycho Rachel Haywire accused Forney of raping Ann Sterzinger awhile back and he wrote this lengthy rebuttal on his blog, it may still be there. Since Ann and Florney look all cozy in those dopey web-casts Forney does, I asked Forney a reasonable question, since HE wrote the article crying bitching about Haywire’s accusation. Matt, did you and Ann have a relationship that was romantic? Again, Forney brought the whole thing up. He refused to answer AND I got banned from commenting on both Roosh’s and Forney’s sites for a reasonable question.. So something happened, perhaps unstated intentions got out of hand with Ann, who knows? Forney got public about an issue, but didn’t want scrutiny brought to his own work, and he banned me. It’s an example of what bloggers do. THEY like to scrutinize, complain, bitch and moan, but you better not challenge their conduct, even if THEY initiated the scrutiny.

    It happens. Forney is a fat-ass half-a-faig anyway, I don’t believe a word of anything he says anymore. He’s no different than Anita Sarkeesian after all. He’s beyond beta, anyone could bitch-slap him around, he’s nothing. Roosh is merely misunderstood, but he does crowd the boundaries a little with his insistence that women have rape fantasies and need to be pushed. With women, No is OFTEN yes, we all know it, but the officialdom of Feminism and the Liberal press took his stories and made him out in the worldwide public eye to be a rapist these past few weeks. The Washington Post, Roosh’s (and my) formerly hometown newspaper, SKEWERED Roosh over the meet-ups and presented Roosh-guys wanting to meet up as latent homosexuals. The Feminists at the Post all had a great laugh over it.

    So you can get banned, they are allowed to ban you and when I get banned, it’s all good. I just don’t read their stuff anymore (I scan ROK still), and move along. As I said, Forney’s stuff isn’t worth the bandwidth, but Roosh is a DC homey, has good writers and I’ve been reading his stuff from DC (RooshV) since the Internet was over a modem, if I’m not mistaken. But banned, I don’t send dough anymore. Ah well. And at the larger, worldwide level, Twitter is no different. It’s their world and if they want you off their planet, that’s it!

    Have a peachy day, Boys and Girls. Here’s hoping the Rock doesn’t ban ME now! Ha!

  39. Anon says:

    Roosh finally fights back against the Neo-Nazis that call themselves ‘Alt-Right’

    The funny thing is, one of the biggest lies the left has gotten away with was to brand the Third Reich as ‘Right Wing’, when in fact it was a left-wing ideology, where the state controlled most major industries. ‘Na-Zi’ is an acronym for Nationalist Socialist, after all.

  40. Roosh needs to calm down a little. It isn’t like they’re coming for HIM. His contention that they are “sending hundreds of angry tweets for the main reason that I’m not white but am seen as attractive and masculine by white women.” Sure they are, I’m sure he’s just swamped by White women, can’t beat them away with a broom. I could tell THAT from the Washington Post a couple of weeks back. There aren’t many white men looking at Roosh as a mudsharker, eithertrust me. Nonetheless, if the alt-right wants to go after someone for the mudsharking, maybe they should knock on the doors of the feminist establishment.

    Democrats are the ultimate racists and it runs in their history. George Wallace, Byrd, the entire KKK of the old South, all Democrats. Jeff Davis, most of the old Confederates, all Democrats. John Wilkes Booth the Democrat killed Lincoln, the Republican. There’s more, but nothing that changes the basic picture. Today, they play their racism for political advantage. It’s also a gender AND race, a mixing of issues, contentiousness and bickering. After all, White feminists, all Democrats, profited mightily throughout the race wars of the 60s and 70s pitting Black men and White men against one another while they robbed the spoils and built themselves enormous privilege for WOMEN, all the while reducing White men to the status of second-class cuckold. Cause? Correlation? Pick one, but it happened. And now, we have commercials and tv shows and the movies all showing and depicting mudsharking-on-demand as white women women wish. Feminism is pretty slick. They’re composed of White women, educated, privileged even as they rob the men in every segment of society. But I see the composition of NOW, Planned Parenthood, most of academia and the professions and offices of the VA here in Boston and everywhere, White, educated women, no women of color, ever. The feminists, White women, helped the race issue along and contributed because it was necessary to get the White men beaten down to advance the feminist interest.

    Feminism always was about what is good for White women. The ultimate Alt-Right, except, they swaddled themselves in the Democrat banner and made it a combination gender/race war and were never really distracted by minority-women. That was another issue, the suffering of Black women, they never were concerned over minority women, plus they despised homosexual men back in the day and of course, we all know what Germaine Greer thinks of transsexual men-turned-women. They have no use for minorities and the alphabet soup of sexual depravity (other than lesbianism) because that detracts from extracting more privilege to the Feminist side. Further proof of White feminism’s disdain for women of color is the mudsharking, the tendency of white women to mate up with Black men of means, fame and/or power. And where are the Black women to go for a good man? Be sure White women that want those men are going to be quite unconcerned. Be sure also that Black women are pissed off about it, too.

    So the Alt-Right can be upset over the race issue, but it’s mostly a pity-party over gender to me.

    My humble opinion, your mileage may vary.

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s