
My book on defending from deplatform attacks is now free - StuntPope
https://axisofeasy.com/axisofeasy/download-unassailable-free/
======
lukifer
I only recently learned about the concept of "flak" [0], as described by
Chomsky in "Manufacturing Consent". It occurs that Cancel Culture de-
platforming shares a lot in common with the last hundred years of coordinated
character/credibility attacks by establishment media, to ostracize heterodox
opinions.

While such flak attacks aren't always centralized (sometimes there are Fox-
News-style "talking points", but often it's an emergent media consensus with
no clear ringleader), de-platforming is an even more distributed phenomenon,
where the Two-Minutes-Hate du jour can have a viral, snow-balling character.
Don't dare speak up against it, lest your head be next on the chopping block.

Without having read the linked book, I wonder how well the strategies would
back-port to surviving flak from the traditional media, who still wield
outsized influence over which opinions should be considered acceptable, which
candidates are "electable", etc. The message discipline in both the MSM and
Cancel Culture is frankly impressive: when the same simple story is repeated
consistently, whether via sound bites or memes, it tends to stick; and the
payload always carries enough emotional charge to bypass all nuance and
intellectual charity. "What I tell you three times is true."

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Flak](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_model#Flak)

------
bityard
> But what you say online has to be sacrosanct. If you really want to protect
> the world from bad conspiracy theories then write a crash course in
> developing critical thinking skills, and give that away far and wide

I find political discussions intensely boring but it just feels crazy to me
that removing peoples' ability to _say idiotic things online_ is generally
considered acceptable by the mainstream these days.

Whatever happened to, "I do not agree with what you say but I will defend with
my life your right to say it?"

~~~
greglindahl
It collided with "If your website's full of assholes, it's your fault."

I'm happy to defend your right to say stupid things from the top of a soapbox
in the public square. I'm not happy to stop business owners from ejecting
assholes from their website.

The web lacks a public square. If you'd like to build one, go right ahead.

------
beering
Glancing around the website, it's not hard to see who the target audience is.
I.e. the people who are most interested in this "defending from deplatforming"
book are the ones pushing conspiracy theories and hate speech. The pitch seems
to tie deplatforming to gov't censorship, which seems to be a popular argument
from people who get deplatformed.

~~~
StavrosK
That's an interesting discussion, though. Is it "right" to deplatform/censor
protests, even if they're very dumb and dangerous? Maybe it's a dangerous
precedent.

Plus, why censor organizing the protest, when the gathering itself is illegal?

------
aklemm
If not being an obtuse jerk is step one, I’m interested.

