Sometimes that is also a tactic to guide support towards controlled opposition.
I’ve noticed that Crowder, for example, when he starts to get scolded by the right for some stupid thing he said or did, will suddenly be “under attack” by YouTube censors. Then everyone forgets the criticism and rallies around him and buys his mugs. But then he never actually seems to be censored, does he?
Tim Pool is also questionable when he says he was “swatted” by the FBI repeatedly. Apparently that’s not how it actually works, according to people I trust who have been swatted. Once the prank call is exposed and the FBI realized they were tricked into going into a false location guns blazing, they flag that address as a target for prank swatting. Then when another prank call comes in, the flag comes up in their system and instead of setting twenty guys in with body armor and machine guns, they give the address a phone call and ask if everything is okay. They don’t keep kicking in your door week after week after week. This should be common sense.
Also I don’t think controlled opposition has to be fully rejected, especially since we don’t ever know for certain who is who. Instead I think we monitor them for what narratives they push or what subjects they won’t pursue. Crowder, for example, told his team not to mention the pharmaceutical company that makes the puberty blockers for kids, which suggests he wants to drum up clickbait about trans kids, but doesn’t actually want to STOP trans kids. At that point I don’t think it’s possible to fully trust Crowder on this issue and we should ask, “Does this guy want us to run around in circles on this issue but never accomplish anything?” But on gun rights, he might be good, and his content on that might be worth sharing.
I don't know much about nick,but he must be a good man,from all the labels the commies put on him.
Sometimes that is also a tactic to guide support towards controlled opposition.
I’ve noticed that Crowder, for example, when he starts to get scolded by the right for some stupid thing he said or did, will suddenly be “under attack” by YouTube censors. Then everyone forgets the criticism and rallies around him and buys his mugs. But then he never actually seems to be censored, does he?
Tim Pool is also questionable when he says he was “swatted” by the FBI repeatedly. Apparently that’s not how it actually works, according to people I trust who have been swatted. Once the prank call is exposed and the FBI realized they were tricked into going into a false location guns blazing, they flag that address as a target for prank swatting. Then when another prank call comes in, the flag comes up in their system and instead of setting twenty guys in with body armor and machine guns, they give the address a phone call and ask if everything is okay. They don’t keep kicking in your door week after week after week. This should be common sense.
You are right,they can be tricky bastards.
I don't follow or watch any of the people you mentioned,so I can't really comment on them.
Also I don’t think controlled opposition has to be fully rejected, especially since we don’t ever know for certain who is who. Instead I think we monitor them for what narratives they push or what subjects they won’t pursue. Crowder, for example, told his team not to mention the pharmaceutical company that makes the puberty blockers for kids, which suggests he wants to drum up clickbait about trans kids, but doesn’t actually want to STOP trans kids. At that point I don’t think it’s possible to fully trust Crowder on this issue and we should ask, “Does this guy want us to run around in circles on this issue but never accomplish anything?” But on gun rights, he might be good, and his content on that might be worth sharing.
Could be he's not fully awake yet,you run into people like that all the time.