We’re basically looking at the privatization of the internet by corporations. The internet is becoming less of a global public venue each year.
If you have views that a corporation doesn’t like you either get censored or moved into an internet ghetto where there is very little internet traffic and publicity.
Fuse, you make a number of good points. I agree that consistency is important, as is having a clear policy presented up front on which these kinds of decisions are made. I found GoDaddy’s rationale a little troubling because of how they twisted their policy and what the website was doing to justify their actions. It would have been one thing for GoDaddy to have a “no hate speech” policy, but they instead relied on their “no terrorism or violence” policy, and I think that’s a stretch (they reacted to the site mocking a victim of terrorism, which is crass and hateful but only incidentally furthers terrorism itself).
That said, I think a “no terrorism or violence” policy is quite easy to justify when properly applied. I even think the government would be permitted under current First Amendment interpretation to prohibit that kind of speech. For example, if the site were trying to coordinate a riot, or to raise funds that would go towards buying guns with which to commit specific acts of violence, those would probably be allowed under ‘incitement’ doctrine and similar recognized exceptions.
Could you explicitly lay out the syllogism that leads to this conclusion? What specifically did I say that you see as the equivalent of saying “I’m ashamed of whites and don’t think they have a right to exist”?
You’ve described yourself as a white nationalist, and white nationalism is not a concept you invented or that you get to define however you want. White nationalism generally entails being anti-miscegenation.
But I also think it follows from things you have said, e.g. if you’re worried about white people going extinct (which is absurd just based on population statistics, even ignoring the social fact that most coupling is assortative by race), I would expect you to see mixed race couples as a threat. If you don’t, could you explain?
Saying that we should not prioritize culture X over culture Y is not equivalent to saying that we should prioritize culture Y over culture X.
There is a meaningful difference between commemorating someone for the good things they did, even though they happened to do bad things as well, and commemorating someone for the bad things they did. It doesn’t follow from the belief that we shouldn’t celebrate people whose only claim to fame was treason against the US in support of slavery, that we shouldn’t celebrate anyone who ever did anything bad (or specifically slavery related). Confederate monuments are monuments to people who are famous for being confederates, and the monuments celebrate their role as confederates. The monuments generally depict them in their confederate dress regalia, and identify them as confederate officers and war heroes. We should not honor that. And that says nothing about people who founded the US, who are celebrated for founding the US. If there’s a statue of Washington anywhere that glorifies him specifically for his ownership of slaves, we should absolutely tear it down. I doubt such a monument exists.
I have a lot to address. I have said that I am a white nationalist? No, you want to peg me as a white nationalist for you want to believe that I am against other races and racist as you said.
My explicitly laid out syllogism starts here…
So without stating that I am a white nationalist, you place a belief system on me as well as your belief system that my belief system is racist. To be a proponent of your white heritage is to be racist? I have more explicit syllogism details down to your cussing that follows my first quote. 
This post is getting too long though. More to come Carleas…promise.
Another fundamental question for you, as you prepare your promised long-form response: What’s the minimum sufficient action or belief that makes a person or an ideology ‘racist’?
It would definitely be made up of actions rather than beliefs and would pertain to person’s rather than their ideologies. The long version of this answer is in the works too.
Still waiting for your answer Carleas.
Let’s take a second to think about how insane all of this is. These companies are using technology invented by whites in a country made by whites in order to shut down a site which promotes something as basic as the existence of white people and the justification for all of this is that a supposed white supremacist (in reality, most probably a scared kid) killed a single useless, fat, white race traitor whore.
It needs to be understood that all of this that is happening in mainstream politics is completely insane, the inversion of basic healthy, reality-based principles like self-preservation of your own group.
It is nothing more than sick, traitorous subversion of white people and their countries by white liberals/cucks, Jews and non-whites. Literally all this equality, tolerance, diversity and other bullshit is nothing more than that.
Whites are completely mentally destroyed and any instinct of self-preservation (white nationalism) or self-expansion (white supremacy) is indoctrinated out of them and if not that, then threatened out of them by gunpoint of mostly traitorous whites, and some Jews and non-whites.
Our society has become so insane and unhealthy that basic stuff like preserving your own kind (white nationalism) and killing your enemies and conquering their territory and resources (white supremacy) is considered extreme and only advocated by a tiny minority of people.
A healthy white society wouldn’t even allow non-whites in in the first place
A healthy white society would SUPPORT sites like Daily Stormer, as they advocate for the interests of the white race and the destruction of its enemies
Yet such basic stuff is considered “extreme” in these insane and sick times we live in.
I’m going to assume now that Carleas isn’t going to take my offer of a debate, predictable of course.
honestly, if whites are that mentally retarded they shouldnt be in power.
ive tried to praise whites, give them claps for their classical music, works of art and mechanics, and medieval culture.
but there really comes a time to say, to put down the old hat and stop investing in a failed cause, such as believing whites can save the planet, when most whites are either insane, hypocrits and/or grossly incompetent. Who are you fighting really? I think you are fighting your own whites, believing they can do better, when this is just whites being whites.
But right to assembly does not also grant the right to use any particular company’s service to facilitate that assembly. Shouldn’t companies be able to deny service on principle (as long as the principle isn’t illegal)?
There are certain protected classes against which it is illegal to discriminate - but discrimination per say isn’t illegal. There is also the power of the people to give their business to better, more consistent companies. This is why corporations are always saying what people want to hear and making nice PR statements to maintain a positive image to the widest net of potential customers. I don’t doubt that that’s what some of this is - but some corporate reactions are genuine. Either way, it’s all legal.
Sorry, but Blacks do far, far worse. Black-on-black violence is 4 times greater than any other combination (but of course, the racist media is not going to tell you about that).
GoDaddy’s decision is definitely something to think about, considering I have seen equally repulsive or worse things said here over the years. Though it may be inconsistent and a possibly shaky business move, I would still say GoDaddy had every right to do it. It’s hard for me to say what I would do in GoDaddy’s position as a private company – one that does not want to be accessory to such cancerous hate.
When did companies operate in regards to profits on their principles? This idea of companies being like a person, all principled, is almost laughable considering it is only to currently serve their political agenda, great fodder for a break out reporter to do an explosive expose, to climb the ladder in their trade for a rag exposing the hypocrisy of such principled companies who will promptly erase their principle when this newfound principle no longer serves their agenda towards impeaching Trump. It’s too bad that their powers stop at the borders of their businesses, unless they are already in bed with the other Democrats in governmental positions, who will continue with every trick in their repertoire to disenfranchise Trump’s base of supporters…too bad that it will backfire in the eyes of the majority of the country, the silent majority who will only enter the Democrats battlefield, efforts to gut the President elects power, should they creep like snakes too close to that line of no return, then liberals will see a rise against them and their poorly principled businesses like Hellfire that has never been witnessed before. Yes, liberal companies are against the extremists on the right, using their principles of no hate speech, violence, and terrorism until they are exposed as hypocrites who let the violent (I mean Peace loving left) ANTIFA and various liberal hate organizations (of which California has the most recorded) use their services in violation of their own principles. The fireworks regarding their principled moves will be spectacular…can’t wait! Yes companies, eradicate free speech and assembly on your moral principles, give the government precedent cases for this Democratic move to gut the Constitution.
So the Democrats, their people and their companies, wish to mischaracterize people and events to silence people and events because they disagree with the free speech that is used, the free speech is disliked, therefore not permitted, however the free speech is not criminal, not illegal, just disliked. Hahaha!
Don’t you mean black-with-black violence where they fight against whoever in a gang rather than individually, their numbers are usually 4 times greater than their opponents. Black violence in general is higher in numbers of incidents from domestic violence, to general assault and batteries, armed robberies, to murders against their own and against others.
Look, let me get this straight, I NEVER and I mean NEVER said I had any confidence in black leaders or black leadership.
What I said was, Interracials are better leaders than blacks and an interracial (such as myself) should be the ruler of africa.
I agree, especially if you promise to provide free relocation to Africa for any dissatisfied, Communist Democrats. They will be freed from hate speech and terrorists.
I will force them to assist the blacks with building, engineering, and other sorts of planning.
…force them with kind words, but of course. 
It’s not like the technology has been appropriated - these companies are vastly white and are making their own moves to secure the future of their country.
The existence of white people is not promoted by clinging to the symbols of defeated secessionist rebellions. The existence of white people does not hang on its purity or the subjugation of other peoples. It is promoted by creating something of value. Innovating. Enriching culture. Raising others up. Advancing our understanding. Cultivating strength in all good people.
If you want to honor your heritage then don’t stunt yourself with false security and the small wisdom that there is no greater unifying principle than race.
The bonds of people have always gone much deeper than race. You have to be psychologically lame or desperate to fall on race as the sole source of your pride and striving. There are much higher things in this world than reverence of this one recent simplification – a half thing, impure, uneven, that can’t possibly carry the whole weight of a person’s identity. Not only are there more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in your philosophy, there is more in you than can be derived from the white race.
I can think of contexts where… I understand… why this mentality exists, the purpose it serves. But it’s going nowhere, and advances no one. It’s a dead end, and not necessarily because it clings to the wrong assumptions, but because it is myopic and clinging by nature.