I normally eschew discussing news of social media censorship: this is not a huge platform; I prefer developing original, fruitful content. But upon James Allsup’s YouTube ban–despite having no previous TOS violations–I feel compelled to pay respects and postulate on what this means for dissenting thinkers going forward.

True, Allsup is still on Gab; but losing a YouTube channel of 450 000 subscribers–on the world’s most popular video sharing website–is nothing less than a towering blow. Accordingly, this post will proceed in a tributary tone.

To my mind, Allsup was an articulate, intelligent commentator: explicating issues related to identity, race, immigration and nationalism. Yet Allsup’s unique value existed not in the topics addressed; rather, in his means of presentation.

Allsup was just an average 23-year-old American that loved his country. He worked out, was affable and cleanly dressed. Ultimately, I think these attributes caused the decision to excommunicate him from YouTube. The elites do not want us to see, through people like James Allsup, that nationalism is a normal, natural and healthy phenomenon.

This significance of ‘optics’ cannot be understated. (On a personal note, the influence of captivating figures–such as Allsup–was instrumental in my political journey). Information matters; but humans are social creatures that strive to create and maintain relationships. Thus, things which thwart our social interactions–such as taking on Dissident Right politics–can psychologically impede individuals from accepting otherwise obvious conclusions.

When advocates appear as normal, relatable people–look good, speak and behave well–suddenly, these psychological encumbrances are greatly reduced. When faced with such advocates–who satiate their psychological needs by fitting in from an interpersonal, social standpoint–people are less strained by pre-existing prejudices. They respond to ‘optical’ figures with thoughts of: “This guy doesn’t look crazy, maybe I should check out his Youtube.” When people enter this mental state, they are capable of processing new, controversial ideas. For the same social reasons, a hate-filled diatribe from an overweight, ugly Klansman, can only alienate people from adopting a Right-leaning, nationalist worldview. It is for precisely this reason, that the media perpetuates said stereotype.

When enough people read or hear unauthorised thoughts from relatable, upright figures, *real* political change becomes possible.

Such is this potential for upheaval, that Allsup had to go. Very far from, as it claims, “giving everyone a voice,” YouTube has censored an honourable man for wrong-think. In doing so, they have cut off his livelihood–ripping food from his wife and young infant’s mouth. Only an evil person could allow, let alone cause such a thing.

Which leads to another question: who was responsible for this latest round of Big Tech censorship? Presumably, a YouTube employee made the procedural, on the books decision. Besides this likely formality, publicly accessible documents show the story delves into more sinister, premeditated territory.

On August 15 2019, the ADL published a report condemning ‘White Supremacist, Anti-Semitic’ YouTube channels that remained. James Allsup was among these channels named; and 12 days after this report, he was correspondingly censored. Evidently, YouTube is not interested in countering violence or actual TOS violations–it is acting on marching orders from the ADL.

When considering this outsized (((ADL))) influence, along with the suppressive efforts of ‘Right Wing Watch’–a George Soros-funded project–we come to a revealing place. Namely, the anti-Semitic ‘canards’ that Jews exercise disproportionate control over media and betray their host nations, appear far less than conspiratorial.

With Allsup piled into the burgeoning graveyard of censored Right-wing personalities, and President Trump impotently “monitoring” the situation, at this stage, Big Tech looks set to crush the Dissident Right altogether. Presumably, small blogs such as this will be permitted to persist. But unless present trajectories change, the Dissident Right will be weakened such that it is incapable of engaging in mass communications.

The persistent de-platforming of the Dissident Right, will ultimately yield dreadful consequences for everyone. We have a legitimate grievance. We have history, facts and evidence on our side. We have a rooted, authentic identity to draw upon.

Because of this, the Dissident Right must be afforded a legitimate means of political expression. For the only alternative is vigilante behaviour. Such behaviour should be condemned as immoral and counterproductive; nevertheless, it will inevitably flow from wholesale, unnecessary oppression.

As once put by President John. F Kennedy,

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible … make violent revolution inevitable.

• Click here for Allsup’s Gab.