The Young Turks Get It Wrong....AGAIN

So I periodically watch the Young Turks' Youtube videos to see what the far left and Progressive movements are saying (although they ironically consider themselves to the be centrists). And like many liberals, they have an unwavering hatred for everything Glenn Beck. And so in order to prove their point, they either hold back some important information or straight up lie.

Here, the topic is Net Neutrality and why Glenn Beck is apparently an idiot for being against it.



Cenk said that conservatives and libertarians should look this up. So I did. And guess what, I'm against Net Neutrality. Like many things, it sounds like something great on the surface, but if you look at it a little more, you begin to see why it's not a good idea. I don't like the idea of companies blocking certain information and many will say that it is against free speech. But don't companies have free speech as well?

If certain cable companies are trying to block material they don't like, then people will not give them their business. Comcast is apparently one of the "violators," but they have their reasons for doing what they're doing. If you're okay with their practices, then you're fine. If you disagree, then take your business somewhere else. That's the glory of the free market. The consumers hold the chips.

The reason why people are against the Net Neutrality is that it would give the federal government (specifically the FCC) the power to regulate the internet. It's not like Net Neutrality would give the government complete control over the internet, but it sets a precedent and a starting point for government regulation of the internet. And it's not just Americans for Prosperity who's against it (click here to see their statement on it), the Heritage Foundation also agrees (click here to see their statement). Do you know who else disagree with Net Neutrality? The Supreme Court.

The Young Turks also touch upon the claim that Free Press is a marxist organization. But really, all they do is make the claim seem ridiculous, which is usually what they do with accusations like this instead of proving it wrong. I mean, who in their right mind tackle the actual argument? They also didn't show the second half of the Glenn Beck clip. Here's the whole clip. Watch it from 1:50 to the end.



So, uh, looks like there's a little more to Free Press and its founder, Robert McChesney, than the Young Turks would like you to believe. Clearly, McChesney and Free Press are all about free speech, right? What's also troubling is that Free Press' motto is "Reform media. Transform democracy." Umm, what's that supposed to mean?

And if that's not enough, McChesney served as co-editor of Monthly Review, which, according to its co-editor, John Bellamy Foster, "it was and is Marxist." (nytimes.com) Its founder, Paul Sweezy was "the nation's leading Marxist intellectual and publisher during the cold war and McCarthy era." (nytimes.com) And oooh, it has included work from Che Guevara. (nytimes.com)

I also find it interesting that Utne magazine named McChesney one of the "50 Visionaries Who Are Changing the World." Although they consider themselves "Not right, not left, but forward thinking" (you mean like progressive?), Wikipedia classifies their political alignment as "Left/liberal." And that makes sense when some of their covers are as follows:

So thanks for the honesty, Utne.

And that's one of the overall problems: so many people and organizations aren't being honest about who they really are. And the Young Turks have no issues with covering up for them. They're perfectly content with assuming that the name "Net Neutrality" is also it's definition. Really, they need nebulous and sometimes contradictory names in order to fool people into taking them for what they are on the surface.