« Tim Pool Daily Show

Are We Facing a Second American Civil War?

2018-04-10 | 🔗
Invest In Your Health - Try CBD Today! Click Herehttps://www.naturalhempoil.comUse the Promo code Timpool for 10% off your purchaseMy Second Channel - https://www.youtube.com/timcastnewsJack Dorsey, CEO of Twitter, recently tweeted out an article that he called a "good read." The article says that a second civil war is inevitable and that we must takes sides because "one side must win."The article explained that bipartisan efforts must stop and that California is going to lead the path forward for the rest of the USA.But California recently proposed a bill that would require social media companies in CA to control for "fake news." But fake news is ill defined and there is no way these companies can actually combat "shitposts." This law will just create restrictions on free speech and do nothing to prevent fake news.If the article posted by Jack is accurate then we could actually face similar bills at the federal level in the future.Make sure to subscribe for more travel, news, opinion, and documentary with Tim Pool everyday.Amazon Prime 30 day free trial - http://amzn.to/2sgiDqRMY GEARGoPro Karma - http://amzn.to/2qw10m4GoPro 6 - http://amzn.to/2CEK0z1DJI Mavic Drone - http://amzn.to/2lX9qgTZagg 12 AMP portable battery - http://amzn.to/2lXB6SxTASCAM Lavalier mic - http://amzn.to/2AwoIhI Canon HD XF 105 Camera - http://amzn.to/2m6v1o3Canon 5D MK III Camera - http://amzn.to/2CvFnnm360 Camera (VR) - http://amzn.to/2AxKu4RFOLLOW MEInstagram - http://instagram.com/TimcastTwitter - http://twitter.com/TimcastMinds - http://Minds.com/TimcastFacebook - http://facebook.com/TimcastnewsBitcoin Wallet: 13ha54MW2hYUS3q1jJhFyWdpNfdfMWtmhZSEND STUFF HERETim Pool330 Washington Street - PMB 517Hoboken, NJ 07030

Support the show (http://timcast.com/donate)

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is an unofficial transcript meant for reference. Accuracy is not guaranteed.
If I were to ask you, do you think major tech companies are run by individuals, war, heavily biased in favour of the left? What would you say? I'm sure many many people are going to say. Of course, they are from twitter to patriotic and Google. Many people on the right feel that there is a heavy bias against them. Coming from these tech companies on article was published a few months ago that talks about how there should not be by partisan support for measures and that one side must win the second american civil war. Why this story is relevant is for two reasons: one. It claims that California leads the rest of the country by about fifteen years. That of California takes an action or propose the bill or something happens fit
ten years later, that will impact the rest of the country and also Jack Dorsey. The ceo called it a good red and treated it out. This article says the left is going to win and you shouldn't support. Conservatives and conservatives are dying and Jack Dorsey the Sea of Twitter tweeted out saying it was a good read. Most people are going to take that to assume Jackdaw. Is heavily biased as a lot of other reasons. People assume that he's biased, but this is just another one, but there's another story here: a state senator California recently proposed a bill that will require any company with a presence in California to hire fact checkers if their publishing information, so a social media site a higher fact checkers to make sure the stories weren't fake news and is a problem with that. Fake news isn't just things that are entirely made up, but heavily biased and slighted stories that can be taken out of context or stories that are deliberately taken out of context to manipulate evil. If gallop
you're really does leave the rest of the country by fifteen years then. Suffice it to say we might actually see federal legislation in the future that wants to us speech before we get started. Let me give a shot out to today's sponsor was helping make all of his possible natural. Have oil producers their products from sustainable that is non GMO uncultivated without pesticides, herbicides, Org Fertilizers they currently have a vast array of products such as flavour, drops beauty products, Helpin Wellness products, anti aging, edibles, raping products and that products CV. They will not get you high or make you incoherent. These are for health related purposes. Only if you want to learn more
make sure you check out natural, have oil that come? You can visit natural, have well that calm and use the promo code TIM Pool to get ten percent off your purchase. First, we'll start with a simple tweet from Jack Dorsey. He just said great, read this tweets as interesting. Take why there's no by partisan way forward at this juncture in our history? One side must win this store and medium starts by saying the next time you call for by partisan cooperation in America and on four Republicans and Democrats to work side by side? Stop it remember the great lesson of California, the harbinger of America's political future, and realise that today, such bipartisan cooperation simply can't get done in this current period of american politics. At this juncture in our history, there is no way that a bipartisan path provides the way forward. The way forward is on the path
l a foreigner blazed about fifteen years ago. This is no ordinary political moment. Trump is not the reason. This is no ordinary time. He simply the most obvious symptom that reminds us all of this each day. The best way to describe politics in America today is to reaffirm it s closer to civil war. Just the phrase civil wars, harsh and many people may cringe it brings up images guns and death, the bodies of union and confederate soldiers. America today is nowhere near the level of conflict or at risk of such violence. However, America, today does exhibit some of the core elements that move a society from what normally is the process of working out political differences toward the slippery slope of civil war? We ve seen it and many societies and many previous historical areas, including what happened in the United States in eighteen. I want to stop here and point out the irony of an article that states you shouldn't seek out by partisan support and work together with the other side, but then planes there are other factors. Pushing us towards a civil war,
At the very least, this article is one of those factors. When you tell people don't seek out by partisan efforts, you are exacerbating the political divide They go on. America's original civil war was not just fought to emancipate slaves for humanitarian reasons. The conflict was really about the clash between two very different economic systems that we're fundamentally at odds and ultimately could not going the confederacy was based on the green economy dependent on slaves. The union, there's a new kind of capitalist manufacturing economy dependent on free labour. They tried to somehow coexist from the time of the founding era. But by the middle of the nineteenth century. Something had to give one side or the other had to win to different political culture is already at odds through different political ideologies, philosophies and world views can get trapped in a polarizing process. That increasingly undermines compromise.
They see the world through different lenses, consume different media and literally live in different places. They starts to misunderstand the other side, then start to misrepresent them. Eventually make them the enemy. The opportunity for compromise is then lost. This is where America is today. The article goes on to talk about the history of California over the past fifteen or so years, and the collapse of the Republican party in California. It argues that you shouldn't support by partisan effort, because one side has to win and Probably he wants his side to win, or at least what he's arguing is that, though the Republicans lost in California, and if there are leading the way than the Republicans will likely lose in the? U S federally as well. The final battle begins and twenty eighteen American
as many parallels to America and eighty fifties or America in the nineteen thirty's, both of those decades ended with one side definitively winning forming a political super majority that restructured systems going forward to solve our problems once and for all in the eighteen. Fifty is weak. A civil war and the Republican Party one and then dominated american politics for fifty years and the nineteen thirty is the Democratic Party won and dominated american politics for roughly the same amount of time California as usual, resolve the early. The Democrats, one, the Republicans, lost the conservative way forward lost the progressive way forward began as we ve laid out in the series. California, is the future always about fifteen years ahead of the rest of the country. That means that America,
starting in twenty eighteen is going to resolve it too. Personally, I find it alarming when anyone thinks homogenized ideas is a good thing. We want a diverse set of ideas, we want people to speak freely and to communicate, and we want the bad ideas to go away while the best idea slowly begin to move forward, but the idea that one political fashion has the best ideas over the other is just not true. It's more like. We need both sides to choose the best of their worlds and bring them together a bill in the California stakes, and it was recently proposed by Richard PAN and it reads the bill would require any person who operates a social media as defined internet website, with a physical presence in California to develop a strategic plan to verify news stories shared on its website. The bill would require the plan to include, among other things, a plan to
the gate the spread of false information. Through new stories, the utilization affect checkers, to verify news stories, providing outreach to social media users and placing a warning on a new story containing false information. It define social media as an electronic service or account or electronic content, including, but not limited to videos, still photographs blogs, video blogs, podcast, instant and text messages, email online services or accounts or internet website profiles or locations. But this all sort of wraps back to Jack Dorsey, the CEO of Twitter, one of the most influential sites on the planet, a website that we use in the U S for political discourse and Jack is seen as being heavily in favour of the left tweeting on an article. He called the good read that said that the left is gonna win and that you
support by partisan efforts. Next, we have a bill being proposed. That says these websites should have to have back checkers. One of the problems with an idea of fact checking a story is that it always falls down to someone's personal bias. It's almost impossible to be fair. I don't think I'm fair all the time I just try to do my best to be fair, but most people aren't going, do that they're going to tell the story the way they see it, and if most people are living in bubbles where they think you shouldn't have by partisan support? Well, then they're going to heavily favour the left and if Twitter, the sea of Twitter were to hire facts, hackers who do you think he would support? You would likely support more people who believed in the article. I just showed you that the left is going to win the left should win and that the next fifteen years, the? U S, will become
a super majority of Democrats. So will this bill pass in California? Personally, I don't think so, but on no expert, so maybe it will, and what does that mean? Does this mean that sending private platforms will also have to fact check every single post published what if your twitter account is protected? Nor can see your tweets? Would twitter still be required to hire a fact checker to make sure your tweet is factual and how would they deal with the billions of post that go through twitter, Facebook annually, every day if you tube, can't actually deal with fake news stories and things that actually violate their terms of service, as opposed to just certain political speech. How are they going to hire factory workers? To make that happen? This bill seems very ill conceived and it's what I often referred to as a chinese fingertips, Problem that the simple solution is not the correct one. Certainly it feels like you just pull your fingers out. You're gonna break free when you actually do something counter intuitive and push in an that's one of the problems,
these bills, certainly when we say that there's a fake news problem, the simple salute: as I know, let's make everyone have to hire fact checkers, but that literally makes no sense. How many factors would you have to hire when every twitter account has to be fast tracked for every single tweet, some of the biggest breaking news stories I've been just tweets with no link, no other article. Two will company that, and people share the tweet they embed between in news stories. The news actually breaks through twitter through you tube through Facebook. So how would something like this work and the bigger dangerous? If these companies are heavily biased, they will likely have fact checkers war also biased, as we saw with Facebook. In August of twenty sixteen Facebook announced they would no longer employ humans to write descriptions for items in its trending section, which attracted controversy over allegations of political bias from gives MOTO former faced by workers, we routinely
suppressed, conservative news Facebook workers routinely suppress stories of interest to concern of readers from the social networks, influential trending new section? According to a former journalist who worked on the project, The individual says that workers prevented stories about right wing, see Pat gathering, Mitt Romney ran, fall and other conservative topics from appearing in the highly influential section, even though they were organically trending? Among the sites users? Facebook fired them all? This is what happens. I wanna make another point about the idea of fake news, because stories that can be true can also be fake news
confusing right, but the example I always give is something that I have talked about called hydroxide acid hydroxide acid will kill you. If you inhale it, it accelerates the corrosion of metals. It contributes to the greenhouse effect. It has been found in tumors. It is a very dangerous chemicals as responsible for many deaths every year, and what, if I were to tell you that this chemical was in Europe, that your ingesting it every day. That sounds pretty scary. It's scary, when you, when you're told as a dangerous chemical, that you are ingesting and makes you wanna take action may be the city should do something. Maybe we should allocate text text funding to fix this problem and here's the truth? I drugs gas, it just means water, it's just a different way to save water, hydroxide ass. It is old hucks. It's also known as data hydrogen monoxide hoax, where you use an unfamiliar term to scare people, but everything I said was true what affair
checker, read that story and say it's true when they have to put a misleading tag on. How would that work? What happens when Those organizations use a subject that you were not entirely familiar with and they do in such a way that you think it sounds much scarier than it really is, and there's no one there who knows what they're talking about. Certainly when I say hydroxide ass, it is water. You all know: water, a safe water is not to save its essential die without water. But what we're talking about something extremely serious like the war in Syria, you could frame certain incidents in certain ways to scare people into supporting once out of the other and to me that is also fake news. How what a fact checker deal with that? If everything in the story was true, our problem with fake news isn't simple and there's not going to be a simple solution
is California State Senator trying to propose fact checkers for social media has no idea what he's doing and no idea we're talking about, because, as I already mentioned, there's no way, you confess check every single tweet and every single youtube. Video is just possible. Perhaps he's just saying they should try that there should be an effort on their part, and I certainly think they should try but we see what happened with Facebook when they do try. So maybe that's the solution either. Honestly, I don't have the solution is, but maybe you all have idea so comment below and let me know what you think: there's a few different things too
dress here. We have the story shared by the CEO of Twitter Jack Dorsey, talking about he current or coming second american civil war, and this article advocates for one side to it. What does that say about Jack Dorsey? Do you feel like he's biased, hey? Maybe it is a good read, it doesn't mean he agrees with it simply because he tweet doesn't mean he thinks it's correct, but it's always important to read things that counter your own personal perspective, swords entirely possible, he's not being biased and he's just saying, hey, look, whether you agree or disagree. You should check this out. Personally, I did find the article fascinating. I also find it a bit paradoxical arguing that their factors pushing us towards civil. Or, and the article itself is telling us not to pursue bipartisan efforts. But what do you think about this? And how do you feel about the bill proposal in California? That would seek to force companies to hire fact checkers to determine whether or not news stories or real, or
let me know in the comments below and we will keep the conversation going. You can follow me on twitter at Timcast to stay tuned new videos. Every day at four p dot m at the weather slowly gets warmer. We are looking to more travel stories so getting on the ground and actually bring you some real reporting from around the way station for that, and I will see you all tomorrow at.
Transcript generated on 2020-06-18.