Today Amazon, Tomorrow, the World

Amazon fell to the control of the power elites, at least for our purposes, on March 6, 2017 when they delisted our entire canon of scrupulous, objective, painstaking research into the (im)possibility of the regnant holocaust mythology, somehow dragging Barnes & Noble’s competing service right along with it like a Siamese twin. Perhaps that was the first domino (or two). More dominos have fallen, and the rest, if there are any, will follow very soon, to be sure.

This time, predictably, it’s YouTube, the online video service that once delivered pretty much anything anyone wanted to post, that didn’t advocate doing physical harm to anyone anytime soon.

As with Amazon, those days are over, and will never return. Would/could some replacement “rogue” service supplant the present King of the Hill so as to expose what at least some of us dare to think or say? Not likely. The present hegemon, to borrow a term from international relations, will no more be replaced by a “more accessible” competitor than the New York Times will be replaced by some upstart (and there are many contenders, from Los Angeles to Peoria) less serviceable to the interests of Israel and global militant Jewry than the “Gray Lady.”

There is an inertia in such things, and a few successful early exploiters of emerging technologies (Amazon, YouTube) manage to capture the inherently monopolistic dynamic of such phenomena and, after they have clearly and solidly done so … are co-opted. It is indelibly written in the habitualistic reflexes everyone unthinkingly develops when finding shortcuts to credibility. Perhaps “trust” might serve as the descriptor of this tendency. Trust that, because it is granted by sufficient numbers to sufficient degree, it is ineluctably betrayed. The Gray Lady serves admirably as epitome of this tendency of our masses.

Google, the search engine for the Collective Mind, fell when it emerged that most people searching on questions like “Did the Holocaust Really Happen” were presented with the fulminations of those who said, “No, it didn’t,” or other sentiments of roughly similar import. This, of course, the product of algorithms utterly innocent of idealistic predispositions.

Today, however, we are blessed, whether we wish to be or not, with the product of persons ipso facto imbued with idealistic predispositions, if only with those they suppose their audiences might be subject to in their masses. This process has been gilded, like an unlovely lily, with the term “curated.” Curated be somewhere (anywhere?) between “edited” and “censored”—the distinction is much in the eyes of the victim/beneficiary. Amazon, YouTube and Google clawed their way to dominance by offering unadulterated, algorithmic freedom. Now that they have unassailable dominance, they can no longer afford to offer their original product, and—the other side of the same coin–they don’t need to, either. They’ve got their habituated, unsuspecting audiences and, people being the way we are, the audiences will cling to their sources the way people tend through their whole lives to like the music they liked in their pubescent years. Only death—of the audience—will part Amazon, YouTube, Google et al. from them. Perhaps these media are growing more “closed-minded” in step with the familiar changes individual people undergo as they age and become more set in their views. This leaves fresh, unconventional thinking in the dustbins that each generation bequeaths to its children.

Only the sudden advent of a new, compelling technology such as computers and the Internet will provide a coming generation with the fresh breeze we enjoyed these past two decades, now lamentably forever gone by. Even if one, or two, comes along, it won’t vanquish hoary artifacts of wars long over, though, will it? Did it?

Our struggle continues, either way. It probably will forever.