Game Under Podcast

Twenty First Century Free Speech: Inter;lectuals

Magic of the Twenty First Century

Over the past few years, many internet intellectuals have taken up the fight for free speech. A few of them, amusingly, have even quoted a white supremacist posing as Voltaire in their activism. But few of them have actually offered any explanation as to why they believe in free speech, or why it is important. Just some ahistorical, aphilosopical rambling about the enlightenment. But surely it is important to justify a political position with some sort of philosophical, historical, pragmatic or even personal reasoning, not just “buzzwords” and fake philosophy quotes borrowed from white supremacists. (To be fair, the major disagreement between Voltaire and white supremacists on race is merely that the former uses polygenism to refute the bible, while the latter usually uses it to confirm its veracity.)

In any case, I justify my own belief in free speech on the principle of hypocrisy. If I am to try and think freely, I ought also to try and speak freely. Not only do I hope this will make me as little of a hypocrite as anyone trying to cast off their mind-forg’d manacles must inevitably be, but it may even encourage my fellow human beings who have the misfortune of encountering me to throw off their own.

Yet while I may be naïve, I am not delusional. I know that this is possible if, and only if, we are able to distinguish between thought and action. This is more difficult than the internet intellectuals who unconsciously obey the playground dogma of sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me would have you believe. Even in the playground, words are used just as effectively as sticks and stones to display status and subjugate the weak. (Or to rise up against the strong.) A scalpel may be used just as easily to end a life as save it. A gun, on the other hand, can only be used to end it. But I digress.

Who will openly deny that someone may be destroyed by what was once a thought and is now an action, whether expressed through violence or other forms of persecution? Who will openly deny that someone may be encouraged by propaganda to turn a thought into an action? Not even the internet intellectuals defending playground bullies in the hope that they will share their stolen lunch money with them openly make these claims.

And yet their actions are those of people who would. Or at least of people so cynical they are willing to defend the prophets of a live-streamed revolutionary race war for social media subscribers and Patreon dollars. Or maybe they actually believe in the explicitly racist and violent rhetoric translated directly from Der Sürmer into memes in one of the most impressive rebranding campaigns since Macintosh—computers for pretentious rich weirdos—became Apple, a Fruitarian cult ripening on the boughs of Objectivism and Neolioberalism for cool rich people; evangelising the book of Jobs and the gospel of the iPhone, respectively. But maybe I’m giving them too much credit, and they’re just so fucking stupid it’s a miracle they can even speak, let alone conceive of abstract concepts like free speech with which they defend the people who will sterilise them as soon as their IQ test results come in. (If I’m right, then I wish them as many participation medals as they need to hang themselves with.)

Indeed, no one with even a cursory knowledge of advertising can fail to see how internet algorithms have (presumably inadvertently) coalesced with economic uncertainty and a culture which worships war and is tickled by torture to create a powerful pot for the psychic meme magicians From the New World to brew their poisonous propaganda potions in. If we are to defend such physics as free speech, we cannot do so without acknowledging that they are laced with today’s fantasists’ and ancient scientists’ favourite biological weapon, the saliva of rabid dogs. And if we are to defend witch doctors who wish to use their free speech to chant taboos encouraging us to kill each other, surely we must translate their taboos, exposing their meaning; for the only defence against magic is to not believe in it—and to not believe in magic, we must understand that it is only a trick; and in defending a magician’s right to cast spells, be able to simultaneously explain to those who might believe in them that they are merely illusions. Otherwise we simply reinforce dangerous delusions.

Rehabilitative Harriki

Since a shitposting 8chan Edgelord literally killed 50 people while larping as Anders B. Breivik  for meme source material, I see the ancient samurai ritual of Seppuku as being the only honourable course of action for the hentai-watching (one of their few positive character traits) ethno-state weebs who not only rely on the acolytes of terrorists for their livelihood, but inadvertently spread the magic spells of mass murder—or even explicitly endorse them.

That said, of course the Scary Red Spectre of “political correctness” (the undefined entity which, in so far as it has any material effect on anyone’s life, is—contrary to its supposedly Bolshevik origins—a form of corporate totalitarianism in an age where we call the servant economy the service economy to save our blushes)  mistakes thought for action, and ought to be opposed as this logical error turns people into prudish pedants, but surely it is possible to oppose political correctness without endorsing terrorists and their ideologues—for these imbeciles make the even graver mistake of confusing action for thought, and this is precisely the mechanism with which someone can be induced to literally kill people for the sake of a meme in the hope of instigating an imaginary race war.

However,  this does not necessarily mean 8chan and its ilk should be censored. I do not believe censoring such things would necessarily snuff them out; it could, just as easily, help to spread their message—the normalising shtick of “white nationalists” is the lie that in what is actually an era of relatively free speech* but repressive pedantry by Victorian prudes, their “actually very reasonable and totally peaceful” ideas on white genocide—or to use the politically correct term for the psychological projection of the discontents of nostalgic empires, the great replacement—ethnic cleansing and race and IQ are being unreasonably mischaracterised by the censorious Victorian moralisers, in just the same way as everyone else is!

Much more usefully, we might instead realise that we live in a society where violent lunatics are able to give voice to the existential angst of the suffering only because the supposedly sane institutions that are meant to interpret the suffering of such people ignore or actively deny their angst could be anything but self-pity.

Commonsensical Dogma for Free Speech Beyond the Playground

In the absence of an academic grounding in philosophy or ethics, the more rigorous internet intellectuals sometimes refer to common sense dogmas. Free speech ends with crying wolf (the theatre is on fire!), threatening people, slander and explicitly inciting violence. I do not necessarily agree with this, but if I do not agree with it, I better have an argument against what even commoners with sense are able to articulate.

And if I put my two cents in anyway, I ought to be aware that by  spreading white genocide (great replacement) propaganda in which enlightened European whites are being replaced by Sharia law-abiding Muslim hoards and other sub-humans (all orchestrated by the Jews, of course, if you investigate this nonsense deeply enough; but it’s bad PR for this bit to be promoted, with its power level tipping the scale at over 9,000, and therefore is not publicly revealed to normies) after decades of war against predominantly Muslim countries and the hangover of an economic crisis, is crying fire in a crowded theatre.

But this would make me, as an internet intellectual, aware that I am not only too stupid to debate commoners, but a morally reprehensible piece of shit, redeemable only by ceremonially disembowelling myself in public. So I understand that even this is probably too much to ask.

 *If it weren’t how would most of us even know white nationalism was a thing, let alone that most people vehemently reject it, and that this rejection hurts the feelings of white nationalists?

P.S. Hideous as they are, internet inter;lectuals might, like Squealer, be human and they, ultimately, might be worthy of mercy. So, no, I do not actually encourage anyone to kill themselves, unless it is in an act of euthanasia outside of the context of eugenics.