Jews Cry Foul After China Revokes Visas Over WSJ Op-Ed (The Jews Really, Really Care About Free Speech)

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
February 19, 2020

The face when you’re really worried about Chinese freedom of speech.

The United States has shut down my freedom of speech – I’m an American citizen arguing for American interests, and they allowed “private companies” to completely silence me across every platform. They also allowed my finances to be shut down.

It’s something a lot more brutal than the Chinese did by kicking some WSJ journalists out of the country.

Every time the US talks about other countries needing “freedom of speech” they are simply lying on purpose. The US has less freedom of speech than any other country in history. Even in the USSR, they didn’t silence you for insulting gays or women, let alone nonwhites or Jews. That was all encouraged, in fact, in the Soviet Union.

This was the CCCP’s own propaganda. So they weren’t going to censor you for saying the same thing.

In China you can keep your bank account, your social media and your websites if you insult Jews, nonwhites, gays or women. China has vastly more freedom of speech than we do. And even if you do insult the government – they might fine you or in an extreme case give you a few months in jail, but when you get out you’re not banned from working or using banks – you’re not even banned from accessing social media!

We have the most brutal censorship regime ever, in all of history.

But they’re going to complain that an op-ed attacking the country of China – who we are basically at war with – is something that the Chinese should tolerate in the name of “free speech”?

This is a sick joke.

New York Times:

China on Wednesday said it would revoke the press credentials of three Wall Street Journal reporters working in mainland China, in a significant escalation of Beijing’s pressure on the foreign news media.

At a daily news briefing on Wednesday, a spokesman for China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs said the credentials would be revoked in retaliation for a headline for an essay that ran in The Journal’s editorial pages earlier this month. The headline read, “China Is the Real Sick Man of Asia.”

Very disrespectful.

Chinese officials have “demanded that The Wall Street Journal recognize the seriousness of the error, openly and formally apologize, and investigate and punish those responsible, while retaining the need to take further measures against the newspaper,” Geng Shuang, the ministry spokesman, said in a transcript provided by the Chinese government.

“The Chinese people do not welcome media that publish racist statements and smear China with malicious attacks,” he added.

Like other media organizations, including The New York Times, The Journal runs its news and editorial departments as separate operations, meaning none of the newspaper’s reporters in China would have been involved in writing the essay’s headline.

The move comes just months after Chinese officials effectively expelled another Journal reporter, Chun Han Wong, from mainland China. Officials did not provide a reason, but the expulsion came after he co-wrote an article about a cousin of China’s top leader, Xi Jinping.

It also comes less than one day after American officials in Washington said they would treat five government-controlled Chinese news organizations — Xinhua, CGTN, China Radio, China Daily and People’s Daily — as foreign government functionaries, subject to similar rules as diplomats stationed in the United States.

The opinion piece with the “Sick Man” headline was written by Walter Russell Mead, a professor at Bard College. It criticized China’s initial response to the coronavirus outbreak as well as the state of the country’s financial markets.

Everything in the media is just pure and absolute narrative. And it is all useless.

These people want to say “it’s different when the government censors you in China than when a monopoly company censors you in America.”

But what is the difference? How does this distinction affect the life of the censored?

How is this different than any other crime being okay for a company to commit against me but not okay for the government to commit against me?

What if it was legal for an organized conspiracy of multinational corporations to kill me, but not legal for the government to do so, and the government also refused to protect me in any way from being killed by a conspiracy of multinational corporations?

Would I be less dead if I was killed by the corporate conspiracy than by the government?

Tell me which one was censored by the government and which one was censored by an organized conspiracy of every tech company in the Western world.

Furthermore, the concept of “the system” is clearly both real and relevant, as not only do the interests of the government bureaucracy and the tech monopolies overlap, they are also continually working together. The internet infrastructure that is used by these companies was built by the taxpayers. These companies get extreme tax cuts. These companies talk about their ability to influence elections. These companies donate to the government. Moreover, both the tech companies and the government are controlled by foreign Jewish agents. There is so much direct overlap that they can and should be considered separate parts of a unified system.

The US regularly refers to Chinese and Russian “private companies” as “organs of the regime.” But somehow that concept doesn’t apply to America, even though the degree of intertwinedness is exactly the same.

This is all simply nonsensical – “a company can violate your Constitutional rights but the government can’t.” It is completely incoherent. And it certainly isn’t what was intended by the Constitution, I can tell you that. Basic capitalism didn’t exist when the Constitution was written, let alone the Libertarian Talmud that has been attached onto capitalism.

If the New York Times or the Wall Street Journal cared about freedom of speech, they would draw up a chart showing what you’re allowed to say without getting censored in China vs. what you’re allowed to say without getting censored in America.

It would look like this:

China United States
Criticism of government No Sometimes (depending on party and specific politician)
Criticism of women Yes No
Criticism of gays Yes No
Criticism of trannies Yes No
Criticism of Moslems Yes No
Criticism of Jews Yes No
Historical revisionism Yes No
Sandy Hook denialism Yes No
Boycotting Israel Yes No
Being against abortion Yes No
Posting FBI crime statistics Yes No
Criticizing Teen Vogue for promoting anal sex to teenagers Yes No
Criticizing CNN or the Washington Post Yes No
Criticizing David Hogg Yes No
Saying the word “retard” Yes No
Being against a CIA coup in Venezuela Yes No
Being against a CIA coup in Hong Kong Yes No
Threatening Baby Yoda Maybe No