Just thinking through this logically, who did Alex Jones’ show ultimately benefit, and who does his removal ultimately benefit?

His show did contain a lot of opposition to and truth about the powers that be. However, I think we can also agree that if we’re being generous, AJ was mistaken in a few important or key details and conveniently silent on some important and key topics.

Who watched his show?

His persona was just outrageous enough to be unappealing or unconvincing to someone who disagrees with him but just quirky enough to be tolerable or even charming to those who agree with him.

Additionally, his brashness on shocking topics is delivered in such a way to be laughable and look insane to someone who doesn’t agree with him, while just eye roll inducing or even funny to those who already do.

The purpose of infowars doesn’t seem to me to be persuasive or eye opening. It seems to be geared to people who already agree.

If key points were disinformation, it seems InfoWars style would be most effective as a weapon of keeping the redpilled just misdirected enough to not be able to actually unite against the right forces. If that was the goal, it would have the potential to be more useful and successful than if it’s goal was to redpill normies.

Further, who does the takedown benefit? If the program wasn’t waking people up, even if it was truthful just not persuasive, then it doesn’t necessarily benefit the cabal. Red pilled people will stay redpilled without infowars, and if anything may find more accurate or persuasive sources for news to learn and spread.

It’s not a harm to those seeking truth, really.

However, some people who have never watched the program or who have watched it, given it some thought and questioned some things, then decided it was too ridiculous to be true info, may see that an oppositional voice was silenced and wonder if they were actually saying suppressed truths. That could spark some people to look into conspiracies at the highest levels and find legit info in that pursuit.

Some people who have never heard of it or cared may hear the story about infowars being silenced for the first time on their Mockingbird network of choice and google what exactly infowars was and stumble upon some redpilled.

Something else interesting: the country is celebrating a news source being shut down. Regardless of what you believe about the news source, this does psychologically prepare people in a gentle way to accept or even find it to be a good thing when news networks are revealed to be harmful and are shut down.

This inadvertently helps POTUS’ fight against fake news, and makes any action he may take against them less jarring. The recent precedent in the zeitgeist is that taking down harmful news sources is good.

This move seems to benefit us and this movement. InfoWars seemed to benefit the powers that be more than us and this movement.

This was either white hats, or just the most recent example of THOSE PEOPLE being stupid and their plans backfiring.

>>2490015 (pb)

I agree with you anon. The conscientious split between Republicans and the subversive Republicans is stronger than the split among the Democrats. There's even a very common name for comped Republicans, "RINO." I don't think democrats have the same.

I also think that because Republicans are the party that more closely values strong boundaries, they've retained a more cohesive sense of morality and appreciation of written law and order. So, it makes sense that this movement would come out of the Republican party rather than the democrats.

I just don't think anyone should fall into the trap of thinking that means Republicans = Good and Democrats = Bad. At least not in principle. There's somewhat of a case for that if we're only talking about present day practicality.

But Trump is not a traditional Republican. He's incredibly moderate by traditional Republican standards. He embraces a lot of the values of the traditional democrat party ("classical liberals.")

The MAGA party is pretty much constitutionalism in philosophy. And while POTUS often takes steps that we shouldn't applaud IF our country was operating perfectly (lots of action from EO's, for example), they are 100% necessary to restore our country to adhering to the constitution in the long term, and situations of crisis like this one are PRECISELY the reason the president has the power to issue executive orders.