Texas State Rep. Phil King just wants to have a hearing to complain about the Federal governments overreach. There isn't really any problem with that. All government actions should be open to questioning. The hearing is invitation only. This is a sort of thing where the speakers get credibility and can sell their book or promote their show or something. King can go back to supporters and say he is fighting the Federal government. It is a free country.
However, since the Republican Party has pandered to craziness, the Texas Nationalist Movement has an expectation that they should be invited to the hearing.
So they are arranging a big call in to King's office. The link is for the call in.
The Texas Republicans are getting the consequences of their actions.
Words have meanings. A banana isn't a cat. Water isn't lava. Sometimes people to advance their agenda will give words new meanings.
In this case, there is an article that Google has decided not to advertise on some of Philip DeFranco's videos on YouTube.
They aren't denying Philip DeFranco the use of YouTube to show his videos. Google just doesn't want to place advertisements with his videos and so there is a cry of censorship. It simply isn't censorship.
You can print a magazine, or produce a video show or a newspaper, but no one is obligated to advertise with you. I would think an organization that is supposedly free market oriented would understand.
Google is an ad agency for their advertisers and has to consider their customer's wants in terms of placement of their ads. Advertisers probably don't want to appear that they are financially supporting repulsive videos. Google would be remiss to take their money and not be concerned where their advertisements are place.
Since the concept of censorship doesn't seem to be understood by the Lew Rockwell people, I am going to give this tutorial.
1. Government prohibits showing of a film. That is censorship. You don't want to buy a ticket and see the movie. That isn't censorship.
2. Government shuts down "Hustler" magazine. That is censorship. Hallmark cards doesn't want to advertise in that magazine. That isn't censorship.
3. The government threatens my neighbor for his opinions on politics. That is censorship. The local paper won't print his editorials and I always like to go inside when he is outside and looking to talk..Not censorship.
4. My neighbor, a different one, has a play shut down by the government. That is censorship. I don't want to be an extra in it nor see it. Others didn't want to see it either. Not censorship. Local reviewer says it is awful and is still walking up in a cold sweat. Not censorship.
5. An art exhibit is shut down by the police. Not censorship. No one wants to see it. Not censorship.
You have freedom of speech, but people are not obligated to listen nor fund you.
Also, I don't know where the "Quietly" comment comes from. Probably YouTube is reviewing many videos all the time. This isn't covert. DeFranco saw the flagging. What does Lew Rockwell expect to have been done, someone calls on the phone and shout.
I am doing the editing of the chapters. I have written all the chapters and someone has done editing and I am doing the final editing of the chapters.
I expect it will be available in mid-September. I am going to use social media to promote it.
It is written for a general audience and the approach is focused on how neo-Confederacy impacts everyday concerns of people in general.
Next I am going to write up "Prelude to Texas Secession" cover the story on how conservative Texas legitimized the idea of secession and have led to the secession movement. I have some unique materials. I am also going to write on Texas secession itself briefly including my counter proposals.
I have to get it done and available by the day after election. My expectation is that Hillary Clinton will win, but not by much, and secessionist movements will take off in many localities.
I hope to resume more regular blogging after my writing is done.
I have been letting some of my Hispanic contacts know about this so perhaps there might be a counter protest.
The Texas nationalist movement is doing the usual steady organizing that you would expect such a group would do. They have tables where they can talk to people, websites where people can sign up. In some ways news stories about them and the Republican party and polling on secession sentiment have helped them a lot since I don't think until this year, most people knew they existed.
However, their movement is essentially on hold awaiting the results of the presidential election. If Donald Trump is elected, the Texas nationalist movement is basically halted and there will be declining interest. The discontented ones which make up these secession movement will have great expectations of a Trump presidential administration. Only if at some point there was strong disillusionment with Trump would secession revive. This disillusion would not be that Trump has failed to accomplish what Trump supporters hope Trump would accomplish, but that Trump himself is not working for their reactionary goals. If Trump faced opposition the tendency would be to unite behind him as long as Trump was working for the goals for which he said he would work.
If Hillary Clinton is elected then the Texas national movement really takes off. The leaders of the Texas nationalist movement can't openly hope for a Clinton victory since their future potential support is with Trump supporters. When Clinton sinks in the polls I suspect that their hopes sink also.
I am getting a sense that the presidential election might be that Clinton is declared the winner late next day by a few electoral votes and with only a plurality of voters.
It will be then a double win for secessionists in that Clinton is elected, but she will not be seen as having a strong mandate.