another organization that makes it bread and butter and jam from (1) obsessing about hate speech and (2) grouping total nutcases like the Bundys with regular conservatives and the whole alt-right is the Southern Poverty Law Center. They also make a lot of money through litigation. they keep a lot of the money for themselves.
While I sort of like Paul Watson and some of what he has to say, IMO he is not a very good spokesperson because his tone is always turned up to “rant,” with a snide undertone, and the way he makes his points is often obscure—only comprehensible to those who already know what he is alluding to. Thus, Watson is not really very educational. And his voice and face are kind of unpleasant.
He might consider getting some coaching to improve both his presentation and the structure of his arguments.
OTOH I am sure there are those who love him just as he is! But I think he could be more useful if he improved his delivery.
I agree with your latter points about PJW not being a good spokesman for alt media and I agree with your personal assessment of a disagreeable tone in his appearance (he gives off the impression of a vampire due to his blood red lips (or lipstick) and pale anemic complexion); there is something creepy or uncomfortable about the way he presents himself.
And you are correct, his oblique references and innuendo “inside baseball” obfuscates the message except for those already familiar with the language of the alt-right and/or conspiracy theorists.
YouTube – along with Google, Twitter, Yahoo and all the rest – is a mission critical asset for Zion’s media-mind control monopoly. Its functions are manifold.
– data mining monopoly
– surveillance monopoly
– advertisement monopoly
– content monopoly (by uploading videos to YouTube you lose the copyright of your work)
– censorship monopoly. No nation can mess with it.
– perfect mind fuck tool, as YouTube & Co will start messing with the content of your videos.
– etc.
Let’s remember. Zion’s intents is to run everything. Including its fake opposition left and right. That is where the limited hang-out shows of Alex Jones and Paul Watson fit in. Why allow goys to express their fear, anger and frustration, when Zion’s lifetime actors can do it so much better?
I don’t know how El Sidney knows who’s a Yank (and who’s a Wank).
Sarcasm in not a particular value or sign of much of anything.
As for the idea of “being up to scratch on sarcasm” what a silly idea.
It is simply one rhetorical device among many, one with particular uses.
I am saying it is the wrong tool for the purpose (IMO).
Nonstop sarcasm ends up obscuring actual arguments and exposition. Heavy sarcasm depends on stating things differently from what they are, and assuming the audience is already on board so as to “get” the irony. That is why I said that I don’t think it is the best mode for informing and convincing.
It is by its nature somewhat hostile. So, a touch of sarcasm here and there is a different animal from a nonstop heavy sarcasm, especially if you are trying to *explain* something new to listeners, instead of assuming they already know so you can coast along making in jokes.
Also, and BTW, I’m not sure Watson does his own thinking. He may be given scripts by others.
For example, I quite enjoyed what he had to say about modern architecture and agree with most of what he said. But I am pretty sure he got it all from James Howard Kunstler (whom he did not credit and whom I have been following for years, although he may be unknown to many members of this community and alt-right sites such as Alex Jones-Infowars world), either directly or from someone who wrote the script for him.
Watson’s delivery being in a permanent rant mode, quickly gets on one’s nerves. It ‘s like listening to a chihuahua for more than 7 seconds. The fact that his videos are edited to close the gaps between sentences makes the rant even more breathless and irritating. Otherwise he is Ok as far as he goes which is not very far at all. He his the kind of person who thinks Barak Obama and Rebecca Solnit are “marxists” and that capitalims is a fountain of abundance and prosperity. And that sums it up.
I agree PJW is not subtle and he has a few blind spots (Jeremy Corbyn is not Blair, and he lumps all muslims together as extremists).
However, given the shocking apathy and total lack of critical thinking so widespread among genXers and Millenials, maybe this is exactly what is needed to wake them up.
His sarcastic rants are actually quite funny- definitely memorable.
another organization that makes it bread and butter and jam from (1) obsessing about hate speech and (2) grouping total nutcases like the Bundys with regular conservatives and the whole alt-right is the Southern Poverty Law Center. They also make a lot of money through litigation. they keep a lot of the money for themselves.
While I sort of like Paul Watson and some of what he has to say, IMO he is not a very good spokesperson because his tone is always turned up to “rant,” with a snide undertone, and the way he makes his points is often obscure—only comprehensible to those who already know what he is alluding to. Thus, Watson is not really very educational. And his voice and face are kind of unpleasant.
He might consider getting some coaching to improve both his presentation and the structure of his arguments.
OTOH I am sure there are those who love him just as he is! But I think he could be more useful if he improved his delivery.
Katherine
Dear Katherine,
I agree with your latter points about PJW not being a good spokesman for alt media and I agree with your personal assessment of a disagreeable tone in his appearance (he gives off the impression of a vampire due to his blood red lips (or lipstick) and pale anemic complexion); there is something creepy or uncomfortable about the way he presents himself.
And you are correct, his oblique references and innuendo “inside baseball” obfuscates the message except for those already familiar with the language of the alt-right and/or conspiracy theorists.
YouTube – along with Google, Twitter, Yahoo and all the rest – is a mission critical asset for Zion’s media-mind control monopoly. Its functions are manifold.
– data mining monopoly
– surveillance monopoly
– advertisement monopoly
– content monopoly (by uploading videos to YouTube you lose the copyright of your work)
– censorship monopoly. No nation can mess with it.
– perfect mind fuck tool, as YouTube & Co will start messing with the content of your videos.
– etc.
Let’s remember. Zion’s intents is to run everything. Including its fake opposition left and right. That is where the limited hang-out shows of Alex Jones and Paul Watson fit in. Why allow goys to express their fear, anger and frustration, when Zion’s lifetime actors can do it so much better?
And see this:
http://www.greanvillepost.com/2017/08/02/googles-new-search-protocol-is-restricting-access-to-13-leading-socialist-progressive-and-anti-war-web-sites/
It’s highly likely that Saker is in the sites of the thought police, too.
Oh dear.
I quite like Paul Joseph Watson.
Maybe some yanks aren’t yet up to scratch with sarcasm.
And sarcasm or not, he’s quite right (oops did I say Right): Conservatism is the New Counter-Culture!
Having said that, I better watch the video now.
I don’t know how El Sidney knows who’s a Yank (and who’s a Wank).
Sarcasm in not a particular value or sign of much of anything.
As for the idea of “being up to scratch on sarcasm” what a silly idea.
It is simply one rhetorical device among many, one with particular uses.
I am saying it is the wrong tool for the purpose (IMO).
Nonstop sarcasm ends up obscuring actual arguments and exposition. Heavy sarcasm depends on stating things differently from what they are, and assuming the audience is already on board so as to “get” the irony. That is why I said that I don’t think it is the best mode for informing and convincing.
It is by its nature somewhat hostile. So, a touch of sarcasm here and there is a different animal from a nonstop heavy sarcasm, especially if you are trying to *explain* something new to listeners, instead of assuming they already know so you can coast along making in jokes.
Also, and BTW, I’m not sure Watson does his own thinking. He may be given scripts by others.
For example, I quite enjoyed what he had to say about modern architecture and agree with most of what he said. But I am pretty sure he got it all from James Howard Kunstler (whom he did not credit and whom I have been following for years, although he may be unknown to many members of this community and alt-right sites such as Alex Jones-Infowars world), either directly or from someone who wrote the script for him.
Katherine
Dearie, dearie me!
Just watched the video.
Sorry, y’all, he seems perfectly coherent to me.
Watson’s delivery being in a permanent rant mode, quickly gets on one’s nerves. It ‘s like listening to a chihuahua for more than 7 seconds. The fact that his videos are edited to close the gaps between sentences makes the rant even more breathless and irritating. Otherwise he is Ok as far as he goes which is not very far at all. He his the kind of person who thinks Barak Obama and Rebecca Solnit are “marxists” and that capitalims is a fountain of abundance and prosperity. And that sums it up.
I agree PJW is not subtle and he has a few blind spots (Jeremy Corbyn is not Blair, and he lumps all muslims together as extremists).
However, given the shocking apathy and total lack of critical thinking so widespread among genXers and Millenials, maybe this is exactly what is needed to wake them up.
His sarcastic rants are actually quite funny- definitely memorable.