Archives For Cancel Culture

Published on the 24th February, and either missed, or overlooked by Legacy Media, China’s leader of the opposition-in-exile, Wei Jingsheng’s 魏京生 short treatise, ‘Why Praise the Tyrant?’, argued that silence, and appeasement, strengthen tyrannical despotism.

He isn’t new to the subject. Branded the father of Chinese democracy, Wei was imprisoned, then released in 1997, as part of a Clinton administration negotiation with then Chinese President Jiang ZeMin.

Wei served a total of ‘18 years in prison’ for non-violent, pro-Democracy opposition to the Chinese Communist Party.

In his February piece, Wei asks, ‘Why are there so many people liking the tyrant?’

He then provides two reasons: ‘First, people become accustomed, numb, they don’t know to be afraid. Second, no one dares to talk about tyrants at home.’

Wei said, ‘people are brainwashed by propaganda, people believe [what they’re told] that tyranny is inevitable [e.g.: for their own good], or at least cannot be overthrown.’

In other words, people are conditioned to embrace the tyrant as an altruistic patron of the people, and tyranny as their benevolent benefactor.

Under a false sense of security, as alluded to by Wei, the populace falls asleep, ‘they accept tyranny as reality – since resistance is useless, just as well lie down and enjoy.’

For his example, Wei uses the Chinese middle class. They ‘belong to this lying down, and enjoy being part of the group, [which is rewarded] with material living conditions which they can lie down and enjoy.’

Wei argues that ‘some people have developed a Stockholm syndrome, who would defend tyrants with tears in their eyes. There is no shortage of this kind of people in the elite class in China, including the elites overseas.’

Condemning manipulative propaganda, and revisionism, he links back to a recent TV series’ portrayal of ‘Qin Shihuang, the founder of the Qin dynasty, first emperor to unite China.’

Wei explains, ‘it is said the part of Qin Shihuang killing his two brothers was censored and deleted, which, for 2,000 years has been viewed by scholars as evidence of Qin Shihuang’s tyrannical character.’

This deletion, Wei said, ‘highlights’ the fact that the ‘core purpose of the censor, is to praise the tyrant.’

If I’ve read Wei correctly, the CCP approved period drama, deceptively revised the history of Qin Shihuang in order to falsely align the Communist Chinese Party with the Qin Dynasty in the hearts, and minds of the Chinese people.

(The article’s translation from Chinese into English isn’t particularly well done, but it’s good enough to get the gist.)

Wei concludes, ‘tyrants have one thing in common, that is, they ignore basic rights, and dignity of the people. For their great goals, they enslave the people, and sacrifice their power.’

This is done by ‘stripping the power away from the people, and imposing severe penalties. In order to implement severe penalties to deter the people, one must ignore human dignity. This includes grooming villains, and cruel officials, corrupting social morality, and creating social unrest.’

China has come a long way financially because reforms embraced a market economy. For Wei, however, when ‘compared with Democratic systems that manage market economies, a Communist managed market economy is a backward system. It can’t adapt to economic development, and technological progress, nor can it adapt to modern people’s pursuit of freedom and dignity.’

Wei then writes, ‘people in the West have now come to realise that continuing to infuse blood into authoritarian countries not only endangers their own interests, but also endangers their own living conditions and values.’

Referring perhaps to the West’s widespread adoption of Communist Chinese C0V1D-19 authoritarianism, Wei said, ‘the Chinese model can no longer be maintained.’

To paraphrase Wei, this means that ‘the tyrant model of cruel repression, that strengthens despotism to save shaky vested interests’ is a fool’s errand.

The ‘blood transfusion diplomacy’ with the CCP is a toxin to Civil Liberties, and Classical Liberal, constitutional democracies.

Can we say this about Cancel Culture, and its alphabet mafia, where the real oppressors march, not with the oppressed, nor for the oppressed, but as the oppressed?

I think so.

As I firmly stated last year, the culture war isn’t between left vs. right, black vs. white, it’s between truth vs. falsehood.

In the context of the Church, if we fail to bring a confession of Jesus Christ up against the clear, and present false doctrines woven into the current platforms of allowable debate, we’ve failed, not only in our civic duty, but as Christians.

At CP we aim to fight for truth over against falsehood by ministering through the vocation of speaking truth in love; informing, by being well informed.

A Christian who isn’t Missional, isn’t a Christian.

Wei is right. The ‘core purpose of the censor [propagandist and revisionist], is [indeed] to praise the tyrant.’

Silence, and appeasement, strengthen tyrannical despotism.

Engagement with the culture is an imperative; joyless defeatism dressed up as “losing graciously”, isn’t a Gospel centred stratagem for Christians in a post-Christian paradigm.

For those who already support us, thank you.

For those interested in supporting us, you can add your voice to that engagement by financially support Caldron Pool here:

https://caldronpool.com/support/


First published on Caldron Pool, 12th March 2021. 

©Rod Lampard, 2021.

Most honest, level-headed people on both sides of the political aisle would agree that the unrestrained, self-centred use of censorship as a weapon, is barbaric discrimination.

It’s big, bright, and dangerous false dawn; cheered on as it sets civil liberties and civil rights on fire wherever it is blown or directed.

The burnt scarring it leaves behind is left screaming silently to the world that the doctrine of original sin can be ignored, but never truly rejected, because its barbarism has, once again, punched its bloodthirsty fists through the gates; salivating after any opportunity to remove, censor, and/or if possible, rape and behead (Cancel Culture style) Conservative Christians, and Classical Liberals.

Chuck Colson called barbarism, ‘inhumanity done in the name of humanity, the killing of people for their own good.’

He said that the new Barbarians weren’t Goths or Vandals, with ‘clubs climbing over the walls, but the well-dressed people [comfortably] sitting in well-lit rooms with clean fingernails, deciding what was best for other people.’

You’d be spot on if you thought Colson was describing the current bureaucratic caste, legacy media, big tech, big medicine, big business, and their elitist egos, buttressed by self-congratulating sanitised tax-payer funded, leftist political bubbles, and a conditioned public programmed to kneel at every word.

High profile examples of this new barbarism were added this week to the systemic trend blacklisting all those refusing to fall in, line up, goose step in unison, salute, and take the [proverbial] Hitler oath of allegiance.

The cancelling of Gina Carano, Disney stamping trigger warnings all over Jim Henson’s creative legacy, ‘The Muppets,’ and Legacy Media throwing outspoken, Australian politician Craig Kelly under a bus, calling him, in sum, an “ego driven Trumpist, and threat to democracy.”

Christian conservative and former Western Australian, LNP candidate, Andrea Tokaji, ‘was dis-endorsed by the WA Liberal Party weeks before the 2021 Election after five months of campaigning for simply exercising her freedom of speech in an article she wrote months before being endorsed.’ (Rowan Dean, SkyNews)

Then there was Coca Cola repackaging the Nazi doctrine of Blut und Boden, by using their brand to push Critical Race Theory, telling white people to be less white.

While the woke World Council of Churches literally called the modern nation of Israel demonic, claiming that alleged human rights abuses were on the same level as white supremacists in South Africa. Noteworthy, the WCC failed to mention the Chi-comms crushing Hong Kong, threatening Taiwan, and incarcerating ethnic minorities, and Chinese Christians.

In addition, privileged “popstar” Madonna, worth $850 Million, while remaining completely silent about Gina Carano being booted from The Mandalorian, demanded an end to the patriarchy, because of male “systemic oppression”.

Even the Vatican was seemingly keen to join the bandwagon.

NPR reported that ‘Pope Francis accepted the resignation of Cardinal Robert Sarah (of Guinea), removing a conservative who was seen as an opponent of the Pope’s vision for the church.’

The differences were stark. Along with Cardinal Sarah’s conviction for the priesthood to maintain the practice of celibacy. Sarah held the line on irresponsible immigration (open borders), and the clear Biblical Christian line on homosexuality, Western Civilisation, and the ‘Churches’ relationship with the Muslim world.’

An exposition from the Express in the U.K. said that the relationship soured years ago. Instead of ‘removing Sarah directly, Francis decided to fill the liturgy department with a number of [centrists] who opposed his views.’

The Summit news concluded that the 75-year-old Cardinal’s retirement was ‘more of a firing’ because Sarah was ‘mandated to submit his resignation when he turned 75, while other serving in the position have been known to continue.’

Barbarianism is punching its way through the gates.

Out of control censorship is a false dawn, consuming all its being directed towards, and there are very few willing to put up a fight.

To paraphrase Colson, it’s easier to fight those whose actions are clearly inhumane. It’s harder to fight those who do inhumane things and call it “humane”.

References:

Colson, C. 2015. A Flight to Amsterdam, My Final Word, Zondervan (p.42)


First published on Caldron Pool, 24th February 2021.

©Rod Lampard, 2021.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is kelly-gvl-caldron-pool-2021.png

Australian politician, Craig Kelly’s Facebook page has been suspended over at least four quotes he’d posted in February. Each post gave expert opposing viewpoints to the accepted expert narrative over treatments for C0VID-I9.

The Liberal Party member for Hughes told The Australian’s Richard Ferguson that ‘Facebook went through thousands of my posts and only found five that led to the ban.’

Kelly, who isn’t an “anti-vaxxer”, said he “supported the Morrison government’s message on vaccinations,” and that all he is only “advocating for treatments in concert with the vaccine.”

According to The Australian, Facebook declined to comment, but said ‘that social media giant would crack down on any COV1D misinformation on its site;’ [quote] “We don’t allow anyone to share misinformation about C0VID-I9 that could lead to imminent physical harm.” [unquote]

Kelly has been a strong advocate for civil liberties throughout the COV1D-I9 crisis.

He is one of the few politicians with the moxie to tell it like it is. Up until his public confrontation with Labor’s Tanya Plibersek, and a subsequent ‘dressing-down’ by the Prime Minister, Kelly took a strong stand for Australians to have the right to “weigh the evidence” before taking the vaccine.

In a blunt explanation for Kelly’s ban, Rebel News explained that he was “booted” for one week for ‘touting the benefits of hydroxychloroquine.

The Guardian, outlining reasons for the social credit score reduction to Kelly’s page stated that

‘The three posts related to: unproven claims about hydroxychloroquine by professor Dolores Cahill; a profile of professor Thomas Borody in the Spectator which includes advocacy of ivermectin to treat coronavirus; and claims by pathologist Roger Hodkinson that masks are “useless” for children and “paper and fabric masks are simply virtue signalling”.’

In response, Kelly told the Guardian that,

“The points are a legitimate point of view. I’m not posting my opinions; I’m posting the opinions of medical experts. “whether [the views are] right or wrong is a matter of debate, but their views should be debated”.

When asked for comment, Craig Kelly told Caldron Pool that “it was a sad day for free speech and public debate.”

He explained that,

“the four they’ve identified are actually not my opinions but opinions of highly ranked medical professionals, which I’ve put direct links to. In fact, one of them was nothing more than a cut and paste job from a story published in the Spectator magazine, on Australia’s professor Thomas Borody, and how he was suggesting Ivermectin could be an effective treatment against C0VID.”

The minister commented on the leap-before-looking, heavy-handed nature of the ban, stating

“The real danger of this is, Facebook argue, ‘It’s against our Community Standards – it’s dangerous stuff. With the studies that are coming through, it’s very likely in the next couple of weeks that the World Health Organisation will actually recommend Ivermectin, which Borody tried to do six months ago; now that debate has been shut down and over a million and a half people have died.”

Speaking directly about the mounting number of reckless bans, and blocking of reasoned content providing an opposing viewpoint, Kelly added,

“The effect of censoring [of] debate on these early treatments could have possibly been responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people.

So, where we should have been having more open debate and more free debate, shutting down debate is likely to have killed people. Not just one or two people, but probably hundreds of thousands. This is why throughout the last 250 years people have said free speech is so important. This is why people have said, ‘I may not agree with what you say but I’ll fight to my death your right to say it.’”

Cancel Culture’s COV1D-I9 fanatics may have scored a temporary win over Kelly, but in doing so they’ve added to further erosion of civil liberties.

Noting the word, “crackdown” used by Facebook, a better headline here would be:

Fascistbook suspends truth-teller for advocating the right of informed consent.

 


First published on Caldron Pool, 17th February, 2021.

©Rod Lampard, 2021

The second impeachment trial of Donald J. Trump has ended in an acquittal.

The charge of ‘incitement of insurrection’ concerned the January 6th security breach in Washington D.C., when a mob participating in a MAGA rally broke from the majority, and forced their way into the Capitol building.

The mob, described as rioters by legacy media, carried out acts of vandalism, which culminated in the tragic deaths of two people.

9News reported that Ashli Babbitt, a female veteran was ‘fatally shot by police’ as she entered the building. In addition, The Guardian reported that Officer Brian Sicknick, died due to head injuries inflicted by Capitol Hill vandals, who are alleged to have struck Sicknick with a fire extinguisher.

Three other people died during the incident, in what 9News referred to in speech marks as “medical emergencies.”

According to The Guardian, 50-year-old Benjamin Phillips, a computer programmer and huge Trump fan, died of a stroke. 55-year-old Kevin Gleeson, died of an ‘apparent heart attack, related to a history of high blood pressure’; and Rossane Boyland, 34, who had a ‘criminal history, including possession and distribution of heroin,’ lost consciousness, due to what 9News alleged was the direct result of being ‘crushed by the crowd.’

The Democrat push to pin the security breach, and subsequent vandalism from both known, and alleged MAGA supporters, on Donald Trump, as “insurrection at the Capitol”, was supported by big government Democrats, big media, big tech and big business.

The Guardian were quick to label the tragic event a ‘planned insurrection,’ joining legacy media’s chorus of buzzwords such as “invasion,” “attack,” and “incitement.”

Joe Biden called it ‘an assault on the citadel of liberty’; and Nancy Pelosi (speaker of the house) – among others – laid the blame on the then sitting President Trump, calling for him to be removed from office.

Silicon Valley joined the assault, using the constructed narrative of “insurrection at the Capitol” as an excuse to boot Trump from their social media platforms; killing off a competitor through the equivalent of a permanent D.O.S (denial of service) attack on Parler; which was justified through the distorted claim that the fervent freedom of speech, social media service, was a hotbed for ‘right-wing extremism.’

The January 6th tragedy involving between 500-800 people was a nexus for Trump’s nemeses.

Four-year-long “hate Trump because love trumps hate” campaigners, got in before a clearer picture emerged, and the dust settled. They called for impeachment, capitalising on the momentum of public confusion and concern.

The following weeks saw Trump’s enemies salivate over the possibility of connecting Trump, and Conservatives to the deaths, security breach, and vandalism.

This involved a ‘new rhetorical framing,’ or ‘rhetorical inflation’:

‘[Where] Trump supporters used to be portrayed as nationalists, as extreme patriots whose desire to “make America great again” was too laudatory of the U.S.A.  Now they are being portrayed as insurrectionists and [anti-American jihadist] terrorists who are trying to destroy America.’ – (Gene Veith/Jonathan S. Tobin)

Far-left Democrats are being true to their “whatever it takes to win” promise. It’s a zero-sum game and they know it.

Just like they knew what they were doing when they ‘played an edited video of former President Donald Trump’s speech on January 6, 2020, at the beginning of the impeachment trial on Tuesday, leaving out his call for supporters to “peacefully and patriotically make your voices heard.” (Breitbart)

Tackling this ‘new rhetorical framing,’ CBN called out the hypocrisy of those citing Trump’s use of the phrase “fight like hell” as proof of incitement to insurrection. Stating that ‘several members of the impeachment team, have used similar rhetoric in the past.’

Such as, but not limited to, ‘Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., as well as Reps. Joe Neguse of Colorado and Eric Swalwell of California, [who’ve all used] “fight like hell” or similar phrasing in their past statements.’ (Fox)

Rand Paul (Rep.Kentucky) used the example of Chuck Schumer’s speech given during the Kavanaugh trial to a mob in front of the Supreme Court, when the leading Democrat said:

“you have unleashed the whirlwind and you will pay the price, and you won’t know what hit you.” – ‘the mob charged the door of the Supreme Court and they tried to tear it down. They stood on top of statues, they were confronting and belligerent.’

Paul, in Trump’s defence then appealed to context, saying,

“The thing [here] is [that] you have to look at the President’s actual words. What did he say? He said go fight. Let your voices be heard, and he said march peacefully and patriotically. How can you twist that into words that incite violence?…I think Democrats if they look in the mirror, they’ve been guilty of much more than they’re accusing Trump of.”

The far-left failing to secure a second impeachment against Donald Trump is a blow to their ‘planned’ “insurrection at the Capitol” narrative (new rhetorical framing).

Stakeholders should take note. This push for the impeachment Trump, on trumped up charges, also shows that the far-left’s libido-dominandi driving the hate-fest for anyone, and anything they deem to be unworthy of an opinion, is far from over.

Cancel culture is on full display here.

Breaking down the votes for, and against impeachment, The ABC revealed a well-organised (“pre-planned?”) co-ordinated approach from the Left, with some on the Right supporting the motion (seven in total).

The Left were unanimous. ‘Senators voted 57-43 not guilty on the charge of incitement of insurrection’, which is 10 numbers below the 67 ‘required to convict’ Trump.

The far-left’s real loss here, is the failure of cancel culture to cancel out Donald Trump’s chances of running for President again in 2024. Which was, according to a wise American friend of mine, “the whole reason for the push for impeachment in the first place.”

The far-left engaging in ‘rhetorical inflation’; the twisting of words, facts, and events, in order to carve out a self-serving narrative, is a greater threat to Constitutional Democracy, and civil liberties, than an imperfect man, who for four years served for next to no pay, in the office of President, but sometimes posted mean tweets to his personal Twitter account.

Trump’s second impeachment trial was a fake charge, based on fake news.

I stand by my statements made earlier this year: The real oppressors are masquerading as the oppressed. Cancel culture is fascism proper.


First published on Caldron Pool, 16th February 2021.

© Rod Lampard, 2021.

Earlier this month Leftists provided another example of how the COVID-19 reflex has empowered would-be totalitarians to abuse power in the name of protecting feelings from facts.

In an ironic move, State Library of WA organizers of the Disrupted Festival of Ideas cancelled a livestream panel discussion on cancel culture, because of heterophobic influenced concerns about Augusto Zimmermann’s presentation.

Zimmermann, a Professor, writer, former Western Australian Law Commissioner, and occasional Caldron Pool contributor et.al, said the ‘event was supposedly about the free exchange of ideas and challenging the status quo and the establishment.’

Instead, it became an example of how ‘privileged individuals’ use cancel culture ‘to suppress dissenting ideas [in order] to prohibit opposing voices that challenge their hegemonic discourse in our democratic society.’

According to The Age, ‘ a SLWA spokesman said the livestream of the cancel culture discussion, held on Saturday, had been cancelled due to one of the panellists not giving permission for it to air ahead of the event. The spokesman said the panellist was concerned the discussion could upset some of his followers on social media.’

The event was tabled as an open discussion on whether Cancel Culture exists, and if so, what defined it. Or whether Cancel Culture was an ‘“alt-right” and “boomer” term used to crush the dissent of militant millennials?”

Graeme Paton, another panellist, defended sexologist and “LGBTQ specialist”, Kai Schweizer’s requests to ban the livestream on the grounds that Augusto’s “position was lacking in nuance.”

Paton argued that in seeking to censor Zimmermann, Schweizer was protecting ‘the vulnerable [Trans] community’ from ‘topics that might have been disturbing.’

Ignoring the unequal treatment shown towards Zimmermann, and the importance of social distancing livestreams under the shadow of COVID-19, Paton claimed that Zimmermann was “exaggerating” what had happened, because he “still got to say his piece; and nobody was against him coming out in a public space.”

Organizers and fellow panellists deploying cancel culture tactics in an event asking whether Cancel Culture is “right-wing” fiction or fact, is peak Leftism.

Like all human self-righteous, self-appointed “paragons of virtue”, they’re oblivious to stench in their own backyards. The Left is, without a doubt, plagued by Plank Eye Syndrome.

The event panellists, and organizers have successfully shown what Cancel Culture is. What defines it, and how it’s weaponized.

Cancelling Zimmermann’s livestream. Pompous mockery in ambiguous appeals to nuance. The asinine refusal to acknowledge the significance of the “COVID SAFE” livestream ban, and the posturing of virtue, as though cancelling Zimmermann was a selfless act, saving lives by protecting the feelings of the vulnerable from facts, is Cancel Culture.

Much the same as abortion, Cancel Culture pivots on a ‘life unworthy of life’ doctrine. True to this, while Schweizer’s concerns were taken seriously, triggering immediate action, Zimmermann’s concerns were dismissed as an exaggeration.

One of the integral foundations of this culture is the arbitrary use of the term “hate speech.”

Under the faux lordship of Cancel Culture, reasoned, verbal disagreement is falsely reduced to an act of physical violence.

Under this, Cancel Culture creates harmful safe spaces, the dismissal/dehumanization of opponents, and the outlawing of ‘honest debate.’

As Martyn Iles wrote:

Rational discussion and mutual respect is ‘a thing of the past. We increasingly live in a culture of power by almost any means…There is an ever-growing strand of left-wing thought which is utterly incapable of understanding anything except by reference to power. It’s the Marxist bilge pumped into kids’ brains all their lives[…]Power is a higher goal than morality[…]That is why they never engage. They just abuse, dox, cancel, and do whatever it takes – ie seize the power.’

I’ve had the privilege of exchanging some one on one correspondence with Augusto over the course of this year. By all counts he’s a good man. Smart, well respected, experienced. Zimmermann knows his stuff. This cancellation nonsense is another sign of the times.

The reality is that hate speech isn’t reasoned, verbal disagreement. The development of good arguments requires engaging with an opposing viewpoint.

Taking into consideration all of the above, “hate speech” is really nothing more than speech truth-haters, hate hearing.


First published on Caldron Pool, 18th November, 2020.

©Rod Lampard, 2020.

Joe Rogan’s $100 million dollar switch from YouTube to Spotify, has been met with controversy over concerns Spotify have censored the ‘Joe Rogan Experience podcast.

According to PodNews there are ‘46 episodes missing’.

Variety Magazine stated that most are ‘[“]far-right[”]  commentators’ such as Stefan Molyneux. Others include personalities such as Tommy Chong (Cheech & Chong fame), Alex Jones (Info Wars) and Mikhailia Peterson (daughter of Jordan Peterson) – among others.

Variety’s overall report was smug. Todd Spangler pointed out that YouTube and Twitter had ‘kicked Stefan Molyneux for alleged hate-speech violations.’ Then passive aggressively accused Rogan, and Spotify of being a ‘willing platform for the far-right fringe.’

(It’s no surprise ‘Spotify and Rogan didn’t respond to requests from Variety to comment.’)’

Variety did, however, clarify that ‘Spotify will become the exclusive distributor of “JRE,” Rogan will maintain full creative control over the show under the agreement. [Additionally,] some content won’t be available until later in the year’

Mikhailia Peterson voiced her own concerns about potential censorship, in a Twitter thread that challenged Spotify to explain why it hadn’t released the full catalogue, when that was what had been advertised.

Cancel Culture, and its new Spanish Inquisitors running off (toxic) Intersectionality rubrics, give good reason for the concern.

Does Spotify not releasing the full catalogue, imply future censorship?

The Rogan Experience isn’t for everyone, but as Bari Weiss wrote in May (before her protest resignation from the NYT), Rogan is filling a gap left by the skittish mainstream media.

A media too scared to tell the truth, unless it supports an organize myth, is safe-space friendly, and blue check verified.

A media which demonizes masculinity, equates melanin (particularly the lighter shades) with sin, hates Israel, kowtows to cancel culture – often surrenders truth to falsehood; and chains life to false doctrines, that promote double standards, division, blame, bitterness and unforgiveness.

False doctrines which sit at the core of new cultural laws, pushed onto Western society by the radical left.

New cultural laws that are enforced by the silencing of any opposing viewpoints that may function as a correction in the struggle to replace lies with the truth, and half-truths with the facts.

As Bari Weiss noted, Rogan likes Bernie Sanders, sees the legalization of Marijuana, evolutionary theory, and faith as open questions. Yet he’s refused to interview Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren.

Rogan isn’t afraid to question the narrative – or more to the point – he isn’t afraid to ask questions of those who are questioning the narrative.

To quote Weiss:

‘while GQ puts Pharrell gowned in a yellow sleeping bag on the cover of its “new masculinity” issue, Joe Rogan swings kettlebells and bow-hunts elk…The prestige press has become too delicate, worried about backlash on Twitter and thus is shying away from an ever-increasing number of perceived third rails.’

Think of Tara Reade. Anyone with eyes could see that her accusation against Joe Biden was treated differently by the press than the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh…You can rely on Rogan to talk about that double standard. Indeed, you can rely on Rogan to talk about just about anything at all.’

With the eventual ‘exclusive’ move from YouTube to Spotify, and the censorship concerns, Rogan has denied that he’s sold out, or that the deal would limit his ability to maintain the show’s straight-talking, raw, free exchange of ideas.

While mocking Alex Jones, and expressing contempt for Stefan Molyneux, Forbes, senior contributor, Dani Di Placido criticized Rogan for associating with ‘pseudoscience and bigotry.’ Claiming that Rogan was ‘amplifying destructive voices’, then lecturing him on how allowing those voices a platform ‘isn’t the same as platforming quirky outsiders.’

Placido, joined some leftists in all but applauding the idea of censoring Rogan, saying that it ‘made sense’, and that this new deal might be Rogan ‘moving away from the baggage of his past.’

Answering the controversy over censorship, Rogan said that, “[Spotify] want me to just continue doing it the way I’m doing it right now,” It’s just a licensing deal, so Spotify won’t have any creative control over the show. It will be the exact same show.” (Forbes)

While cancel culture’s vultures circle the deal, posturing elation at the thought of converting Rogan through fear of cancelation, and/or muzzling yet another alternative media personality, the biggest concern for Rogan could be distribution.

BNN Bloomberg said that being exclusive to Spotify, ‘Rogan was taking a risk. There’s a chance he will lose the majority of his audience, since Apple accounts for more than 60 per cent of listeners for most podcasts.’

From Peterson’s caution about censorship to Placido’s jubilation at the prospect, there’s general agreement across the board.

It remains to be seen whether the formidable, freedom-loving Rogan can stop cancel culture from getting its cold, boney death grip around the Joe Rogan Experience, and ripping its heart out on altars built by our would-be leftist overlords, in worship to their prevailing anti-liberty ideological hegemony.

I’m not a huge fan, but I’m optimistic. The reason why is worked out in what is, in my opinion, one of Rogan’s best anti-cancel culture discussions on the net: #1006: Jordan Peterson & Brett Weinstein.

The other side of this is that Rogan didn’t just arrive on Spotify. His unique podcast, and hard work got him there.

Cancel culture vultures won’t be feeding on their prey anytime soon.


First published on Caldron Pool, 7th September, 2020.

Photo by Austin Distel on Unsplash

© Rod Lampard, 2020.

Watch as both white and black police officers respectfully try to school (or perhaps its better to say unschool?) this leftist, white woman, after she accuses the white police officer of being a racist (and therefore evil) because of his shade of melanin.

One of the officers near the end nails it saying, “let me tell you something, America has a sin problem. The world has a sin problem. Jesus said “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the father except through me.” America and the world has a sin problem. That’s where racism, injustice, and hate, and anger, and violence, are coming from. It’s not about racism. Read the Bible!”

Associating evil with skin colour in the name of anti-racism, is racism. Worse, it’s demonising a complete ethnic group in much the same way the Nazis demonised the Jews, and in the same way Bolsheviks demonised the “kulaks”. The end result of this kind of thinking is bloodshed.

You can help end this before it gets to that point, by speaking truth into the falsehoods, and rejecting that trajectory as graciously as possible.

Big kudos to these lads from law enforcement.

“Blessed are the peacemakers…”


Video: Breitbart