8 Reasons to Switch From YouTube to DTube – by Ian Buckley (Make Use Of) 16 April 2019

Video viewing is predominantly an online pastime. Streaming services like Netflix have changed the face of media forever. And sites like YouTube rely on centrally collected videos which they send to devices on demand.

This isn’t the only way it can work though, and DTube is an example of a decentralized video network. Today we’ll look at what DTube is and how it works, but first, let’s look at how online video sites usually work.

How Most Video Sites Work

YouTube, along with almost every other streaming video website, is a centralized service. For most people, this isn’t a problem. Video content uploads to YouTube’s servers and is searchable through YouTube’s search function. Then, the content streams to devices in whatever format YouTube thinks is best.

This way of working is not without its merits. A centralized service provides the same content to all. Some say, however that centralized services are a problem.

What’s Wrong With YouTube?

Since all storage for video content is on YouTube’s servers, users ultimately have no control over what happens to their videos. YouTube decides what should be on their platform, not YouTube users. If you want to make money from your videos through advertising, YouTube is the broker which decides what is fair to monetize and what isn’t.

YouTube’s algorithm is supposed to promote content fairly, but some content creators notice discrepancies in this system, allegedly making some channels disappear overnight.

In this way, centralized video could be a bad idea. But if YouTube sucks, why is everyone still using it? Well, not everyone is. Some people have switched to using DTube!

If YouTube Sucks, Why Is Everyone Still Using It? If YouTube Sucks, Why Is Everyone Still Using It? YouTube is dominant right now, and despite its recent woes, there are plenty of reasons to believe YouTube is going to continue dominating the world of online video. Read More

A Brief Look at DTube

DTube's text logo

DTube is a decentralized video service that exists on a blockchain rather than a central server. If you are new to blockchain this explanation on our sister site Blocks Decoded should help. Creators can use the service knowing that their data is safe. Furthermore, video content cannot be censored by anyone outside of the DTube community.

Money accumulates through cryptocurrency rather than relying on adverts, and there is no hidden algorithm, opting instead for direct user feedback to rank videos.

That is a lot of terms to take in quickly, so let’s break things down one by one.

1. DTube Is a Decentralized Platform

First of all, DTube has no central servers. All of the content is stored on a blockchain. By nature, a blockchain’s data verifies between all of its members.

This is an example of Distributed Hash Tables (DHT) and works similarly to peer to peer torrenting of information. Consequently, there is no one definitive video file in one place, more a shared agreement of what the video file contains.

This makes it difficult, if not impossible, to tamper with video content on DTube. It is not the only online app looking into this kind of secure operation. If you’ve ever asked yourself whether a truly decentralized internet is possible, DTube is an example of it at work.

Is a Truly Decentralized Internet Possible? How It Could Work With Blockchain Is a Truly Decentralized Internet Possible? How It Could Work With Blockchain Is a truly decentralized internet possible? What does decentralization mean, and how would it keep you safe? Read More

Decentralized videos mean there’s no simple way of removing content from the site. This could be a blessing or a curse. For some users, however, the assurance that their content is not in the hands of a large organization is a big draw, and a reason to switch to DTube.

2. DTube Is a Secure Service

No central server means no single place storing all of the user’s data, ready to be hacked. Everyone posts under set pseudonyms and the site does not have a traditional login, opting instead for the Steemit platform.

You can identify yourself any way you wish, but there is no way for data you are not comfortable sharing to get leaked.

3. DTube Doesn’t Have Adverts

Since DTube uses STEEM dollars as its currency, there is no need for traditional advertisements. Users upvote videos to give them worth. Popular videos receive STEEM Dollars and STEEM Power. Provided the total value of the video is over $0.02 in the first seven days this money gets paid into the creator’s STEEM wallet.

Creators are free to advertise within their videos, but many users are averse to advertisements, therefore relying on STEEM seems to be the best way to monetize videos on the service.

4. You Can Earn Money on DTube

You may already have realized that DTube sounds like a pretty attractive platform for content creators, and you would be right. Steemit frequently makes new tokens for distribution, so it is easy to start earning.

Even upvoting videos can earn STEEM power, but it’s the content creators that reap the real benefits. The platform is already popular with vloggers, many of whom make content about DTube itself, as well as cryptocurrency at large.

A significant difference with DTube is that videos only earn money for seven days. Whatever you have made in this time is paid into your STEEM wallet. The video remains on the site, but it stops gaining currency.

5. Dtube Has No Censorship

Another way DTube can benefit you is with its free speech stance. Decentralization means no traditional way of censoring videos. While YouTube gets to decide what is right for its platform, DTube is different.

The community itself judges all video content. In principle, the service allows anything on the site, but in practice, the community is good at filtering out useless or dangerous posts. For a simple analogy, think of Reddit without mods. This could be Heaven or Hell depending on your viewpoint.

6. DTube Has No Recommendation Algorithm

YouTube bases its recommendations on a supposedly fair system of metadata analysis. Whatever you think of this, it is certainly not clear who or what will receive a recommendation to a broader audience at any given time.

DTube gets around this problem by basing its recommendation system on user views and votes. If the community thinks your video has value, your video will gain traction and rank among the trending videos.

7. DTube Has a Good Community

What is DTube infographic, each point is explained in the article text.

DTube has a tight community, with many content creators linking up on projects and sharing each other’s work. Many users liken DTube to the early days of YouTube and the community aspect of similar channels collaborating.

This active community, together with the financial incentive that being social on the platform brings, make DTube a vibrant young community on the rise.

8. DTube Is Not Part of the Big Five

Google, Amazon, Facebook, Microsoft, and Apple are tech goliaths. Between them they utterly dominate tech. It’s rare to find any service that doesn’t use them in some way. Most people don’t consider the reach these companies have or don’t believe it to be an issue.

DTube is independent of these big five, so if avoiding large tech corporations is something you aspire to, DTube could be for you.

DTube Is Part of the Blockchain Revolution

Blockchain technology is changing our media, and sites like DTube are pioneering new ways of sharing both creative content and wealth.

DTube is just a small part of a larger movement, and the whole blockchain revolution shows little sign of stopping. Which means there has never been a better time to become a Blockchain programmer.


These eight short story collections would make excellent sci-fi anthology shows – By Andrew Liptak (The Verge) 26 May 2019


Since the beginning of the modern science fiction genre, authors have built careers on writing short stories, for magazines and anthologies — and more recently — on websites. While those works don’t quite get the same attention as a novel, collections of an author’s short fiction has long been a good way to catch up on their published repertoire. Recently, there’s been more attention on shorter fiction thanks to projects such as Netflix’s Love, Death + Robots, and a new anthology series based on horror author Nathan Ballingrud’s fantastic collection, North American Lake Monsters.

What’s more, a number of anthology shows have popped up over the years on a variety of streaming services. Netflix and Channel Four produced Black Mirror; CBS recently brought back The Twilight Zone; HBO is running Room 104; Amazon adapted a variety of stories from Philip K. Dick for Electric Dreamsl and Hulu has its horror-themed Dimension 404. There are other projects on the horizon as well: AMC began developing a series based on Ted Chiang’s story “Liking What You See: A Documentary”, which was featured in his 2002 collection, Stories of Your Life and Others, and set up a writer’s room for a show based on the short stories by Ken Liu.

It’s easy to see why anthology shows based on short stories are appealing: they don’t represent a whole lot of commitment from viewers, and provide a lot of variety. A science fiction writer’s collection of short stories can provide both: self-contained, bite-sized narratives that can play out in 20-40 minutes. Don’t like one? Skip to the next. With word that Ballingrud’s debut collection is in the works, we had some ideas for other single-author collections that might make for a good anthology series in their own right.


Six Months, Three Days, Five Others by Charlie Jane Anders

io9-cofounder Charlie Jane Anders has forged a notable career for herself in recent years with a number of fantastic short stories and two excellent novels (disclaimer: I used to work for her at io9) and released a short collection called Six Months, Three Days, Five Others through Tor.com.

It’s a small collection, but each of the stories pack a punch, from “The Fermi Paradox Is Our Business Model” about an alien civilization that seeds the galaxy with life, and waits for them to burn themselves out, in order to cheaply extract resources. The title story “Six Months, Three Days” earned Anders a Hugo Award in 2012, and is an emotional story about a woman who can see all possible futures, and a man who can see one true future. This book would make for a great short-run series. At one point, “Six Months, Three Days” was in the works for a TV adaptation as well.

This short collection would make for a great series of emotional and thought-provoking episodes.


I, Robot by Isaac Asimov

Forget the 2004 “adaptation” of Isaac Asimov’s collection of robot stories. That film was a thriller that used a bunch of the bigger ideas that the author came up with over the years, but doesn’t really adapt any of the stories.

The original short story collection contains 10 of Asimov’s classic robot stories, each of which revolve around a central premise: The Three Laws of Robotics that govern the behavior of his robots. Each story deals with a loophole in that programming, from “Runaround,” about a mining robot on Mercury that gets stuck in a loop; “Liar!” about a robot that causes problems when it doesn’t want to hurt a couple of humans’ feelings; and “Evidence,” a story about a politician who is accused of secretly being a robot.

The entire collection would make for a fantastic anthology series, one that deals with the ramifications of technology and how it can break.


Pump Six and Other Stories by Paolo Bacigalupi

If Black Mirror is anything to go by, audiences will tune in for extremely bleak science fiction. One good example of this comes in the form of Paolo Bacigalupi’s collection, Pump Six and Other Stories.

Bacigalupi is best-known for books like The Windup Girl and The Water Knife, which have some pretty bleak portrayals of the future of our planet. That tendency carries over in this book: his story “The People of Sand and Slag” is about a trio of genetically modified humans guarding a a mining corporation in the distant future. When they discover that an “intruder” is really a dog, they try and keep it alive. It doesn’t go well. Another, “The Tamarisk Hunter” about a bounty hunter named Lolo who’s tasked with finding and killing water-thirsty tamarisk trees in a California gripped by drought.

This wouldn’t be a happy series, but it would make for a great, pointed show about the dangers of climate change.

How Long ‘Til Black Future Month? by N.K. Jemisin

This was one of our favorite books that came out from last year: N.K. Jemisin’s collection of short stories, which span the breadth of cyberpunk, epic fantasy, and hard science fiction, all of which provides some pointed commentary on the inequality present throughout the world.

This particular book would make for a great series, with stories like “The City, Born Great,” following the personification of New York City, and “The Ones Who Stay and Fight” about a utopian society where knowledge of inequality is forbidden.

The collection is a timely and relevant body of work, and a series based on this book would sit nicely alongside something like Hulu’s The Handmaid’s Tale.


Tomorrow Factor by Rich Larson

Rich Larson has become one of my favorite short story authors working right now (disclaimer: he provided a story for an anthology I edited, War Stories: New Military Science Fiction), and last year, he released a collection called Tomorrow Factory, which pulls together 23 of his recent short stories.

Larson’s stories are quite a bit of fun to read, and cover a lot of territory: cyberpunk adventures about an orphaned albino girl who discovers a mech in the midst of a garbage dump in “Ghost Girl,” or about a basketball scout who discovers that a prospect, Oxford Diallo, isn’t quite what he appears in “Meshed”, to space opera like “The Ghost Ship Anastasia,” about a starship repair crew that runs into all sorts of problems on one difficult mission.

These stories would make for a really fun, dynamic series about how we use technology.


The Unreal and the Real by Ursula K. Le Guin

If there’s one classic author whose work would make for a fantastic anthology series, it’s Ursula K. Le Guin. She hasn’t had a great experience with adaptations — the less said about the SCI FI Channel’s adaptation of Earthsea, the better. But her stories are really fantastic, and another attempt would probably go over a lot better now.

She’s released a number of collections in the last couple of years, but one recent one is a reissue of The Unreal and the Real, which contains nearly 40 stories, broken into stories that are set in a realistic world, while others are set in more fantastic locations, like her world of Earthsea, or in her larger expanded Hanish space opera universe.

This collection — or others that she’s published — would provide a solid basis for a brilliant series of short stories that reflect on the morality of society and cultures here on Earth or on distant worlds.

The Wandering Earth by Cixin Liu

Cixin Liu might be most famous for his novel The Three-Body Problem and its sequels, but he’s also released a number of short stories over the years, which have been collected into a book, The Wandering Earth.

If that title sounds familiar, it’s because the story that it’s based on was recently turned into China’s first big science fiction film, which you can now watch on Netflix. It’s a big, epic space disaster story, and there are other big stories like “Devourer”, about an alien ship that floats through space consuming planets, “Mountain”, about a group of aliens trapped in a bubble of rock, who try and discover what lies beyond their world, and “Sun of China,” about a boy from a rural town who grows up to become an astronaut on a solar installation in orbit.

Liu’s stories are often described as a throwback to the genre’s classic age, and this book (minus Wandering Earth) could make for a fantastic series about some epic adventures in outer space, provided you had the right budget.

View of a Remote Country by Karen Traviss

I first came across Karen Traviss through her Wess’Har War and Star Wars novels, but for a several of years, she published a number of fantastic short stories in a variety of publications which she later collected into a self-published collection, View of a Remote Country.

There are some really fascinating stories in this book: “Suitable for the Orient” follows a doctor who’s stationed on a distant planet amidst a conflict between the native lifeforms and the human colonists, while “An Open Prison” depicts a future where convicts are locked up in a mechanical suit and are forced to serve the public and the people they’ve wronged.

I’ve often found Traviss’s stories to be interesting mediations on people and technology, and the pitfalls between them.



Anne of Green Gables Meets Nietzsche

Anne Meets N

It was a strange summer, the summer of 1882.  Friedrich Nietzsche had followed his doctors suggestion and left his gloomy home town in Germany to visit a holiday vacation spot on the shores of the Atlantic in Canada. There he met Anne.  That’s Anne of Green Gables.  She now lives in the Public Domain.  And so does the immortal soul of F. Nietzsche and all his published and unpublished works along with the representation of his character and person in works of fiction.

Yes, a strange summer indeed.

Anne wondered if she was up to the task when the grumpy German ‘philosopher’ got out of the carriage and ambled slowly up to the gate of the guest house. Anne was an orphan girl who had been sent to help out at an older couple’s seaside inn and guest house.  The couple had wanted a boy, but settled for Anne when she proved she had a boyish side and worked hard to please the guests at he hotel.

On that memorable day Anne put on a big smile and her best ‘glad to see you’ persona and stepped forward.  She did not give a hint that she had read a number of  Nietzsche’s dreary works.  His tired arguments matched his tired body.  No wonder he was depressed and depressing.  Anne vowed to do the best to fix that.  This was ‘can do’ Canada, not ‘Don’t do that!’ Deutschland!

There is nothing perky spirit can not defeat.

Anne decided to take a direct approach to the stiff shirt German writer.  When Nietzsche sat down to tea in the outside dinning area Anne deliberately spilled very hot deep brewed hot coffee on his starched white shirt front.

“Oh, pardon me,” Anne said in a mocking tone.  “I must be one of those utermenschen you write of in your books about.  I have spilled coffee on a Superman.  Maybe coffee is your kryptonite.”  She laughed and laughed and laughed at the dower German sage.

“I’ll have you fired!” he thundered.

“They don’t pay me,” she retorted.  “I’m an orphan who was sent here by mistake.  I became a big tourist attraction and national heroine because of my poignant antics and ability to draw people out of themselves.  The government publishes stories about me.”

“What?” Nietzsche blustered.  “I’ve never heard of you!”

“Maybe you’re not reading young adult teenage girl literature.  Do you know who Nancy Drew is?” She wiped off his shirt giving the man his first human contact since he bumped into a station porter near a train in Berlin two weeks earlier.  “Since its publication, Anne of Green Gables has sold more than 50 million copies and has been translated into at least 36 languages. The original book is taught to students around the world.  More people have heard of me than have heard of you.  Your works are practically unreadable.”

Again Nietzsche was astounded that a young slip of a girl would speak to him in such an impudent tone.  What could she know of his work?  “Do you read German?” he asked dismissively.

“No,” she retorted looking him right in the eye.  “I must rely on translators.  Are you so arcane that you can’t be translated into simple English?”


“Ha. Charlatan! Your ‘philosophy’ is nothing but ruling class bully logic.  I’m top dog, so, what I do is right! Say I’m wrong, and I will bite you to death!”  She laughed more.  “What a sophisticated outgrowing of the ‘weakness’ of supposed Christian softness.  Ancient Hellas would have seen you for what you are – a worshiper of tyranny.  Might makes right dressed up in five hundred page books.  A clear eyed school girl can see through you.”

That night Nietzsche hastened to read up on Anne of Green Gables.  “I believe I have met my match,” the cranky old ‘confirmed’ bachelor said out loud as he slipped between his bed covers with one of Anne’s volumes in his hand.


The next morning Anne served Nietzsche his breakfast in the cheerful sunny breakfast patio.  Birds were singing in the trees and a few wispy clouds drifted by a blue, blue sky.

“God’s right in his world, ” Anne sighed as she poured a cup of coffee into a cup for Nietzsche.

“God is dead!” responded Nietzsche.

“Oh, not today, you,” Anne said playfully.  “I promise not to pour coffee on you today if you’ll give us a smile.”

The man tried his best to smile.  He wondered if he had smiled in the last month or more.  He did not make a habit of going around grinning at people like a monkey on a chain with an organ grinder playing for money.  He paid people for services, and they provided the services for money, there was no need for smiling as if customers and workers are friends.  That is the way of the real world.  Anyone can see that except maybe for a young girl.  A sweet summer child.

But, then it was summer.

Each night, alone in his room, with one light on, Nietzsche read about Anne of Green Gables.  What a girl.  He had never met a girl like her.  He had never read about a girl like her in Classical or German literature.  Well, except maybe for ‘Heidi’ by sssss


In the days that pass the talkative outgoing Anne draws the moody sullen Nietzsche out of his shell.  The old man learns of Anne’s bleak early childhood spent being shuttled from household to household after her parents died in a hot air balloon crash, caring for younger children. She is excited to finally have a real home at Green Gables.

“Have you ever had a bosom companion?” Anne asked as she passed buttered whole wheat toast to Her N.

Flustered, Nietzsche reached for his German-English translation guide book and tried to get the exact meaning of the girls words.  Was she asking if he had ever had sex with a woman?  That’s how he caught Sisyphus and started rotting his brain.  But, apparently that’s not what she meant.  Anne had a close girlfriend, that’s what she meant by a true friend of the bosom.

“I had friends and admirers when I signed up to be a Prussian cavalry officer when I was young, ” Nietzsche said.  “I was very good, but one day I cut my leg jumping onto a horse.  I thought I was a superman flying through the air.  But, cold steel brought me down.  I had to leave the army and my friends behind.   When Prussia made war on France in 1870 I went to help stop the Paris Commune.  First we fought the French forces of Napoleaon III who we defeated.  But then the workers and leftists and socialists in Paris rose up and declared a workers government.  Both the Prussians and the French then immediately joined together to face the common enemy of the common people.  I was only a medical worker, but I got wounded with diphtheria and dysentery.  I think that’s when I caught the sexual diseases that eat away at my brain.  I was out celebrating our victory over France by fucking a French whore, but I think the whore gave me a virus that causes syphilis.

Over the days and then weeks of that summer Anne spent many hours at table talking with Nietzsche about life and love.  Friedrick found that although she was a young girl she had big ideas and read widely.

She listened with keen interest as Friedrick told her of his German nationalist sister who wanted to set up a colony of pure Germans in South America.  Nietzsche’s sister wanted to get far away from Jewish people.

“But,” Anne pointed out, “Doesn’t Germany have the greatest number of Germans in the world.  If you wanted to have a pure German state, isn’t that where you’d start?”

“Don’t ask me,” chuckled Nietzsche, “I’m a stateless person, I renounced my Prussian citizenship.”


“I wrote a whole book about that, it has to do with master – slave relationships.”

“Are there slaves in Germany today?”


“But you wrote a whole book about the master – slave thinking in Germany, and how Christians, the masters of the imperialist world, are somehow hobbled by a passive slave way of thinking,” Anne looked at Nietzsche.  “Are you on drugs?”

“Yes, morphine and opium.”  He made a screwy motion with his finger next to his head.  “I write out prescriptions for myself and sign them Doctor Nietzsche.  I have a doctorate in literature, and I guess that’s good enough.”

“Why are you in such constant pain that you can’t face the world without being sedated.  Did you ever wonder that you write such unending ‘philosophical’ drivel when you are basically high all the time.  Clear writing comes from clear thinking.  Only crackpots like yourself enjoy the bizarre word salad of your body of ‘thought.’  What nasty trash.  You should be ashamed of yourself.”

“You’re pretty blunt in your assessment.  You come from stories that are a bunch of sugar coated sermons about how girls should get along in the world.  Who are you to preach?”

“Too preachy, but… I preach.  That’s your self serving ‘logic’ in a nutshell.  Imagine, you are going nuts from the virus you picked up at a brothel when you thought you were being a ‘superman’ because you were in charge, because you were paying.  Ha.  Looks like the ‘super virus’ from the reality that’s only an illusion defeated your ‘will to power.’  What a bunch of upper class clap trap.  Philosophy?  Ha!”

“What should I do”

As they grew closer Anne convinced Nietzsche to drop out of sight. Nietzsche let his sister take control of his writings and she hired an actor who sat propped up in a chair and pretended to be the incommunicado philosopher guru hiding behind a giant mustache with wild eyes and a hidden message.

Back in Prince Edward Island Friedrich became a kind of Mister Anne of Green Gables.  He abandoned his old ways and left his old habits and way of thinking behind.  He spent many hours out and about in a boat with Anne as she helped him come to terms with life and indeed love.

Anne explained to Nietzsche that the idea of God was as important as any story about God that people had a need for.  God was a kind of metaphor for human cooperation and goodness.  A metaphor could not die, and therefore, God could not die…’

“You know,” he scratched his freshly shaven upper lip, “you’re right.  I never thought of it that way.”

“Just one last thing before we go any further… your autobiography was entitled “Ecce Homo…”

“I can explain that…”


Back to Work – My Assault on ‘Ulysses’ by Joyce

I have Spotify playing Leopold Bloom’s soliloquy as I type.  I have been involved with ‘Ulysses’ by James Joyce for the past three days, or so.  I feel compelled to read and become acquainted with a work of writing that is supposed to be one of the best novels in the English language.  A true work of superior art.  They say.

I can’t think of ever having met someone in my adult life who had mentioned reading ‘Ulysses.’  But, lots of the books I read seem to be read by no one.

When I brought home the collection of Great Books that I bought for $49 young Randy said, “These look like the books in the library that no one ever goes near.” 

I laughed as I unpacked my cherished old books.  “Someone better read these books, your whole civilization is based on them.”  From Aristotle and Socrates to Shakespeare and Newton – they could all fit on one long bookshelf.  All those ideas.

What are the ideas in ‘Ulysses?’  That the author can imitate past literary styles in various chapters?  That the writer has a good grasp of Greek and Latin Classics and can make many allusions to the stories of the ancient world.  Imagine that?

I went to Catholic school and I periodically recite some of the lines from the Latin mass.

Per omnia secula seculorum, Domino vobiscu

Kyrie Elason…

Yes, the words from a dead language live in my memory when I was a child and a youth going to the weekly meetings of the official state religion of the late Roman Empire.  I get the references.  But, where is the humor?  What laughs or jokes are there in Latin in Ulysses?  There are two Boston Public School Latin Schools a few miles from me.  I lived with two different women who went to Girls Latin School which became Latin Academy.  I have always been interested in Latin language and people who know a little Latin.  But, Ulysses seems to just have some Latin thrown in as a kind of decoration, or something that the educated twenty-somethings and current literature lovers that James Joyce had occasion to banter with utilized. 

Maybe I am just being obstinate.  I’m sitting in a grey kitchen on a gray day with green trees out the screened window and dull blue sky behind.  The air is cool.  I have warm green tea.  On the iPad mini to my left the words of Leopold Bloom are coming to me … the actor reading is E.G. Marshall.  Good reading, but I am picturing the actor from the 1967 movie. 

But what of the observations on life and love from the character of Leopold Bloom and the writer James Joyce.  The character is supposed to be in 1904 Dublin, Ireland, and the writer was working between 1914 and 1920.  

A lot of the concerns of characters in the story seem to be about sexual intercourse, or arranging to be with a person for the purpose of physical copulation.  Yet, for all their talking and stream of consciousness no one ever seems to express the desire to live in another kind of society were people could have a freer sexual life.  While there are many unhappy marriages in the story no one ever seems to have heard of divorce.  No one seems to be aware of the many intellectual movements advocating liberalized divorce laws and more sexual freedom.  Too busy making obscure references to Greek myths.  

The magazines that first published James Joyce serialized novel were not working class socialist periodicals or  revolutionary communists who looked to the Russian Bolsheviks.  James Joyce was published by wealthy bohemians who wanted a new kind of art with no rules and no meaning.  Disaffected upper middle class intellectuals flocked around the literary and political magazine ‘The Little Review’ that published sections of ‘Ulysses’ in the US.  The US Mail police seized copies of the magazine and put the work on trial for ‘obscenity.’   The magazine had anarchist Emma Goldman writing pieces and latter Ezra Pound who became a public admirer of fascist Italian leader Mussolini.    

The upper-class drop outs of the 1920’s love the ‘nothing really matters’ nihilistic approach to planning for the future.  Somehow the events of World War One  – The Great War – had shattered the ability of some people to plan for the future.  The planning in 1904 Dublin proved shortsighted, therefore… I don’t know.  They seem to give up planning, or wondering how society should be justly organized in light of real human needs.  But… I need to move on at the moment, so I will leave ‘Ulysses’ on the bookshelf and the iPad with the audio off.  Actually, the hardcover volume of ‘Ulysses’ is in my bed snuggled up to the Cliff Notes I use as a tour guide.  Of course I am not reading the book straight through – was it written that way?  Was it published in magazines that way?  Or is this a years long word puzzle?

U joyce

EU Election Roundup – Europe Polarizes Between Nationalists and Globalists as Old Parties Fritter Away – by Guillaume Durocher • 23 May 2019

The day is here! After five years, a new European Parliament has been elected! What is the European Parliament? That doesn’t matter too much. On the human level, it is a retirement home for has-been politicians and a trial area for the new generation of (increasingly rootless frequent-flyer) whippersnappers. In terms of policy, it influences the regulation of the European Union’s substantial common market, one of the three largest economies in the world. However, these elections are of interest to us primarily as a snapshot of Europeans’ minds and an indication of future political prospects.

In 2014, I wrote about the breakthrough of about 200 nationalist or soft-euroskeptic MEPs (that’s ‘Members of the European Parliament’) and the consequences over the last five years have been basically zilch. Other than giving said nationalists and soft-euroskeptics are more secure financial and political base.

Anyway, what happened this time? Turnout around was 50.9%, bucking the secular trend of ever-declining amounts of voters. This is the highest proportion of voters in EU elections since 1994 (56.7%). It seems – in the age of Trump, Macron, and Salvini – people are more convinced of the urgency of voting.

For the big picture results, I may as well quote Wikipedia:

The traditionally-dominant center-right conservatives (“European People’s Party,” sounds decidedly virile in the original German: Europäische Volkspartei) and the center-left Social-Democrats have suffered significant setbacks, losing about 40 seats each. Neither has any kind of narrative or distinguishable set of values, but have got along by inertia. Manfred Weber is a colorless party figure hailing from Bavaria (his election slogan in that region: “A Bavarian in Europe!” . . . this ‘good European’ did not use that slogan elsewhere). Nationalist parties in Italy and France have fully replaced the conservatives as the dominant force on the Right. Put simply, there’s nothing “Christian” about these Christian Democrats (and most Europeans are not meaningfully Christian anymore anyway) and represent nothing more than stability and big business, which are not very compelling.

Personally, I was again disappointed to see how badly the French conservatives did (unperforming the polls) despite their new EU election spokesman, François-Xavier Bellamy. “FX,” a 33-year-old philosophy teacher, is high-brow conservative highly critical of immigration. Evidently his brand of conservatism did not resonate with voters however, preferred to go for either Macron or Le Pen.

Frans Timmermans, who is also the current vice-president of the EU Commission, is a fanatical multiculturalist who has issued dark threats against all those who wish to have a homeland of their own: “Diversity is humanity’s destiny, there is not going to be, even in the remotest places of this planet, a nation that will not see diversity in its futures.” Well, everyone except the Jews, Timmermans as Dutch foreign minister took a leading role in opposing non-violent economic measure against the Jewish ethnostate of Israel.

The Social-Democrats are crumpling just about everywhere, having been virtually annihilated by the kiss-of-death of François Hollande’s term as président fainéant, and hitting unimpressive double-digit lower-bounds in the major Western-European countries. Even the relatively-ideological, but unclear on Brexit, Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn did rather badly with 14.1%. The Social-Democrats represent nothing if not moderate “gibs” for the people. But a redistributive program is not very compelling when just about everyone’s basic needs are actually met (housing, fridge, smartphone…) and, anyway, you’re committed to open borders and, therefore, submission to rootless international capital (outsourcing and unskilled immigration undercutting wages, facilitation of tax evasion via “the free movement of capital,” economic submission to bureaucrats in Frankfurt and Brussels, as well as international high finance, in the context of the Eurozone…)

Incidentally, the arch-Zionist Socialist former prime minister of France, Manuel Valls, tried to switch to Catalan politics (his nation of birth…) by running as mayor of Barcelona in a simultaneous election. He finished… fourth.

There was a breakthrough however in the actually more globalist Liberals led by the arch-globalist Guy Verhofstadt, who claims to dream of a “federal” Europe, but certainly a Europe in which all the indigenous ethnies have been blended into one big, brown, insipid global soup. Anything else would be Nazism, you see. The biggest gains were made in France through Emmanuel Macron’s “Renaissance Coalition” of liberals, EU federalists, and globalists, winning 22.4%, far ahead of the conservatives and socialists, consolidating the presidential party’s status as the default party of government. Macron’s European optics – with a voluntarist rhetoric demanding an Europe puissance, for a “sovereign, united, and democratic Europe, able to go toe-to-toe with the United States or China – often have downright Spencerian undertones even as it is highly unlikely he will ever deliver.

The Greens, who if anything are even more diversitarian than the Liberals (they even have two group leaders, IIRC for gender equality reasons), also made significant gains, whether in Germany, France, or Britain, doing better than the Social-Democrats and/or the conservatives. The Greens in both France and Germany did best among the youth, highlighting their idealist streak.

Salvini celebrates, as one commenter notes, in front of Christian, Trumpian, and Putinist iconography.

Of greatest interest to us, the Nationalists (“Europe of Nations and Freedom”) made significant gains with 22 extra seats, essentially reflecting Interior Minister Matteo Salvini’s massive breakthrough in Italy with 34.3% of the vote, far and away the biggest party, achieving double that of his vague-populist coalition partners, the Five-Star Movement. I invite people to browse Salvini’s Twitter feed to see why he is so appealing to normies despite the widespread leftist rage against him.

In Belgium – where there were simultaneous elections to the national and EU parliaments – there were big gains in the region of Flanders, with Vlaams Belang (Flemish Interest) winning some 18% of the vote, sextupling their presence in parliament and becoming the second-biggest party in the country. Much of the credit for this must go Dries Van Langenhove, the 26-year-old activist whom I had the pleasure of interviewing for Unz, who has does so much for Flanders’ identitarian awakening among Flemish youth and on social media. VB’s performance if anything exceeded his expectations and Van Langenhove has been securely elected to the Belgian parliament. The new nationalist party Vox in Spain has entered the EU Parliament with 6.2% of the vote.

There have also been disappointments for Nationalists however. Geert Wilders’ Dutch Freedom Party (PVV) received very few votes, their support apparently be capitalized by the more high-brow patriots of Thierry Baudet’s Forum for Democracy (FvD). In Austria, the Freedom Party (FPÖ) has seen a small decline in votes to 17.2%, mild punishment for a ineffectual stint in government as a junior coalition partner and a well-timed corruption scandal involving party leader Heinz-Christian Strache.

Some have touted the fact that Marine Le Pen’s National Rally (RN) is the single most popular party in France, beating Macron’s Renaissance 23.3% to 22.4%. In fact, this is decidedly unimpressive: the Front National (FN, before Marine renamed the party) was already the leading party in 2014, when it achieved 24.7%. Thus, despite five years of more globalism and despite (or because of) ditching the brand her father Jean-Marie Le Pen had built up over decades of struggle, Marine’s party has made no gains, but if anything is falling behind. She has been wholly unable to capitalize on the mass discontent of the gilets-jaunes. The French results show a pathetic fragmentation of the political landscape: the conservatives, Leftists, and Socialists all are stuck in the single-digits. The ‘patriotic’ vote was split between among a few minor formations, namely Nicolas Dupont-Aignan’s Debout la France (3.51%) and the RN civic-nationalist renegade Florian Philippot’s The Patriots (0.65%), winning no seats.

The moderate euroskeptic conservatives (ECR), dominated by Britain’s Tories and Poland’s Law and Justice party (PiS), did poorly, essentially because of the collapse of the Tories. This was despite the governing PiS party doing very well, winning a whopping 45.4% of the vote, despite intense liberal and globalist opposition movements. There was also progress to the right of PiS, with the breakthrough of Confederation under glorious moustache man with 4.5% of the vote.

The Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy Group (EFDD) – a potpourri of anti-establishment parties, most notably UKIP / the Brexit Party and the Five-Star Movement – made gains, essentially through the stunning first-place finish of Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party with 31.7% of the vote. This is all the more remarkable in that Farage did this after leaving UKIP and founding BP a mere six months ago. This reflects frustration among the good English folk with the pathetically divided and useless Conservative Party and its failure to withdraw Britain from the EU, as decided by the sovereign British people in referendum.

Finally, the Far-Left did badly, I don’t know why, I assume because money does not grow on trees. (Ruling Syriza declined somewhat in Greece.)

Congratulations! You are now fully-equipped to understand the following graph:

Far-Left (GUE/NGL), Social-Democrats (S&D), Greens/EFA, Liberals (ALDE), conservatives (EPP), euro-skeptic conservatives (ECR), populists (EFDD), Nationalists (ENF)
Far-Left (GUE/NGL), Social-Democrats (S&D), Greens/EFA, Liberals (ALDE), conservatives (EPP), euro-skeptic conservatives (ECR), populists (EFDD), Nationalists (ENF)

European identitarians like Jean-Yves Le Gallou have expressed the hope that the rise of nationalist and populist parties will lead to gridlock in the EU Parliament, limiting the further damage to Europe that the globalists might be tempted to do. Certainly, the contingents of far-left, populist, and nationalist MEPs will make their work more difficult. However, as can be seen above, the EPP/S&D/ALDE/Green mainstream still enjoy a majority of some 67%, so a continued globalist “grand coalition” appears quite viable. This however represents progress insofar as it eliminates the fake opposition between actually interchangeable and globalist “center-left” and “center-right” which has dominated Western politics at least since the 1970s.

This high-level overview obviously does not do justice to the very diverse and complex situations in the various nations. We can however draw some conclusions.

Voters are becoming more ideological. The conservatives and Social-Democrats, while still the largest groups, have lost their status as the default ruling parties in Europe. In several countries, notably France, Italy, and Greece, they have been overtaken by newcomers. European citizens want principles, they want a project – be it globalist, environmentalist, populist, or nationalist – rather than the insipid social-democratic or ‘Christian’-democratic gruel which has been served up to them for decades.

Patriotic government is popular. Who knew, right? It turns ought that most voters, who are basically apolitical and are just trying to get on with their families and lives, are attached to certain symbols of their people and homeland, and like the idea that the government is on their side. Apparently this insight is beyond the grasp of the geniuses who run the Republican and Democratic parties, hence why Donald J. Trump is president of the United States, a far more perceptive man on that mark. This inishgt is also well beyond the capacities of the leaders of the EU. Besides Timmermans ethnocidal statements, EU Commission President Jean-Claude infamously declared that “borders are the worst invention ever made by politicians,” marking the head of Europe has a historical illiterate. The border, indeed the city wall as established in the ancient Greek polis and at Rome, represents in fact the foundation of civilization. Juncker also could not prevent himself from making other provocations in the final days of the EU electoral campaign. We should not too surprised if Juncker hates borders however: as prime minister of Luxembourg he has spent most of his career as effectively the head of a tax haven.

Ruling patriotic parties did outstandingly well not only, as we have seen, in Italy and Poland, but also in Hungary, where Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz amazingly managed to secure an absolute majority of 52.3% in what was a proportional, multi-party election! Contrast all this with the mediocre performance of the Trump Administration and the pathetic failure of the Tories. The beauty of patriotic promises is that, most often, they can actually be fulfilled. The Left cannot deliver infinite money, the EU-federalists cannot deliver a coherent EU, but the patriots certainly can drastically reduce the influx of immigrants and defend their people’s culture and existence, if only there is the will. If a European country “flips” to nationalism, this may be quite durable, as the silent majority supports a stable, patriotic government ostensibly defending their interests, not to mention if the government takes measure to restore ideological pluralism in the media (rather than the 85% left-globalist media diet we are used to).

In fact, I dare say that symbolically patriotic, “sovereignist” leadership is no doubt default form of human government: witness Putin’s Russia, Erdogan’s Turkey, Modhi’s India, or Abe’s Japan. Indeed, the optimal politician in a democratic capitalist system will be verbally patriotic and in bed with big business. Like it or not, that is who this system rewards.

These elections mark the increasing entropy of Western politics as the politico-media sphere has become more democratic, through increased ideological pluralism, notably through social media and the declining power of television and the papers. This will make the EU more ungovernable and politically amorphous than it already is. Perhaps this will eventually lead, like in the 1920s, to an honest critique of democracy and then a correction, rather than the dishonest postwar system which extolled ‘democracy’ as the only acceptable form of government, all the while corporate and media elites substantially dominated politics.

A powerful, sovereign Europe would require a reconciliation between the head (liberal/Green-voting elites) and the heart (nationalist-voting masses). I dream of a virile Europe, creative again, proud and life-loving again, embracing human biological and spiritual realities, again at the forefront of human discovery and enterprise, rather than stuck in the vain quest for comfort and equality. Well, if this ever exists, it won’t be anytime soon. Western Europe, sleepwalking in a comfortable haze since 1945, has some ways left to go before there will be anything we can call an awakening.

Democracy vs. the Putin-Nazis – by C.J. Hopkins (Consent Factory) 23 May 2019

consent factory


Back in January 2018, I wrote this piece about The War on Dissent, which, in case you haven’t noticed, is going gangbusters. As predicted, the global capitalist ruling classes have been using every weapon in their arsenal to marginalize, stigmatize, delegitimize, and otherwise eliminate any and all forms of dissent from neoliberal ideology, and in particular from their new official narrative … “Democracy versus The Putin-Nazis.”

For over two years, the corporate media have been pounding out an endless series of variations on this major theme, namely, that “democracy is under attack” by a conspiracy of Russians and neo-Nazis that magically materialized out of the ether during the Summer of 2016. The intelligence agencies, political elites, academia, celebrities, social media personalities, and other organs of the culture industry have been systematically reifying this official narrative through constant repetition. The Western masses have been inundated with innumerable articles, editorials, television news and talk show segments, books, social media posts, and various other forms of messaging whipping up hysteria over “Russians” and “fascists.” At this point, it is no longer just propaganda. It has become the new “truth.” It has become “reality.”

Becoming “reality” is, of course, the ultimate goal of every ideology. An ideology is just a system of ideas, and is thus fair game for critique and dissent. “Reality” is not fair game for dissent. It is not up for debate or challenge, not by “serious,” “legitimate” people. “Reality” is simply “the way it is.” It is axiomatic. It is apothegmatic. It’s not a belief or an interpretation. It is not subject to change or revision. It is the immortal, immutable Word of God … or whatever deity or deity-like concept the ruling classes and the masses they rule accept as the Final Arbiter of Truth. In our case, this would be Science, or Reason, rather than some supernatural being, but in terms of ideology there isn’t much difference. Every system of belief, regardless of its nature, ultimately depends on political power and power relations to enforce its beliefs, which is to say, to make them “real.”

OK, whenever I write about “reality” and “truth,” I get a few rather angry responses from folks who appear to think I’m denying the existence of objective reality. I’m not … for example, this chair I’m sitting on is absolutely part of objective reality, a physical object that actually exists. The screen you’re probably reading these words on is also part of objective reality. I am not saying there is no reality. What I’m saying is, “reality” is a concept, a concept invented and developed by people … a concept that serves a variety of purposes, some philosophical, some political. It’s the political purposes I’m interested in.

Think of “reality” as an ideological tool … a tool in the hands of those with the power to designate what is “real” and what isn’t. Doctors, teachers, politicians, police, scientists, priests, pundits, experts, parents — these are the enforcers of “reality.” The powerless do not get to decide what is “real.” Ask someone suffering from schizophrenia. Or … I’m sorry, is it bipolar disorder? Or oppositional defiant disorder? I can’t keep all these new disorders psychiatrists keep “discovering” straight.

Or ask a Palestinian living in Gaza. Or the mother of a Black kid the cops shot for no reason. Ask Julian Assange. Ask the families of all those “enemy combatants” Obama droned. Ask the “conspiracy theorists” on Twitter digitally screaming at anyone who will listen about what is and isn’t “the truth.” Each of them will give you their version of “reality,” and you and I may agree with some of them, and some of their beliefs may be supported with facts, but that will not make what they believe “reality.”

Power is what makes “reality” “reality.” Not facts. Not evidence. Not knowledge. Power.

Those in power, or aligned with those in power, or parroting the narratives of those in power, understand this (whether consciously or not). Those without power mostly do not, and thus we continue to “speak truth to power,” as if those in power gave a shit. They don’t. The powerful are not arguing with us. They are not attempting to win a debate about what is and isn’t “true,” or what did or didn’t “really” happen. They are declaring what did or didn’t happen. They are telling us what is and is not “reality,” and demonstrating what happens to those who disagree.

The “Democracy versus The Putin-Nazis” narrative is our new “reality,” whether we like it or not. It does not matter one iota that there is zero evidence to support this narrative, other than the claims of intelligence agencies, politicians, the corporate media, and other servants of the ruling classes. The Russians are “attacking democracy” because the ruling classes tell us they are. “Fascism is on the march again” because the ruling classes say it is. Anyone who disagrees is a “Putin-sympathizer,” a “Putin-apologist,” or “linked to Russia,” or “favored by Russia,” or an “anti-Semite,” or a “fascist apologist.”

Question the official narrative about the Gratuitously Baby Gassing Monster of Syria and you’re an Assad apologist, a Russian bot network, or a plagiarizing Red-Brown infiltrator. Criticize the corporate media for disseminating cheap McCarthyite smears, and you’re a Tulsi-stanning Hindu Nazi-apologist. God help you if you should appear on FOX, in which case you are a Nazi-legitimizer! A cursory check of the Internet today revealed thatfar-right Facebook groups are spreading hate to millions in Europeby means of some sort of hypnogenic content that just looking at it turns you into a Nazi. Our democracy-loving friends at The Atlantic Council are disappointed by Trump’s refusal to sign the “Christchurch Call,” a multilateral statement encouraging corporations to censor the Internet … and fascism is fashionable in Italy again!”

This post-Orwellian, neo-McCarthyite mass hysteria is not going to stop … not until the global capitalist ruling classes have suppressed the current “populist” insurgency and restored “normality” throughout the Western world. Until then, it’s going to be pretty much non-stop “Democracy versus the Putin-Nazis.”

So, unless you’re enjoying our new “reality,” or are willing to conform to it for some other reason, prepare to be smeared as “a Russia-loving, Putin-apologizing conspiracy theorist,” or a “fascism-enabling, Trump-loving Nazi,” or some other type of insidiously Slavic, white supremacist, mass-murder enthusiast. Things are only going to get uglier as the American election season ramps up. I mean, come on … you don’t really believe that the global capitalist ruling classes are going to let Trump serve a second term, do you?


C. J. Hopkins is an award-winning American playwright, novelist and political satirist based in Berlin. His plays are published by Bloomsbury Publishing (UK) and Broadway Play Publishing (USA). His debut novel, ZONE 23, is published by Snoggsworthy, Swaine & Cormorant Paperbacks. He can be reached at cjhopkins.com or consentfactory.org.

I was banned from Reddit’s r/AmateurWritersBlock subreddit – Perhaps I’m not blocked enough as a writer – 29 May 2019

14 May 2018 q

(29 May 2019 – I just typed this up and was going to post it on r/AmateurWritersBlock – but — I’m banned from the subreddit. I’m blocked from writers block. That is the kind of writers block I experience everyday. Gate Keepers with few ideas – but lots of ideas about who else to block and how to stop ideas.)

I was encouraged as a writer in college by various teachers and writers. But, I was implement tied many times. Vast hours of time and a desk and paper and pen and typewriter would be before me… to no end.

Over the years I kept a personal journal. I had no particular aim, or format or… anything. I started in high school after reading about Henry Thoreau and Winston Smith keeping journals of their thoughts.

Some days I wrote many pages; sometimes a month or two would pass with no entry. When I was in a happy relation with a woman I usually wrote less. My happy thoughts were poured into my partner, not onto paper.

Sometimes I had a bound volume I bought at a stationary store, and other times I had left over school notebooks. When I took ‘Behavioral Educational Psychology’ in graduate school I began to look at my journal as an activity I could target.

I abandoned the idea of a polished ready-to-publish writing style that was formal and a little stiff. I decided that I wanted to go for maximum number of pages put out. Forget about the quality. I started to write things I would never want published. I was writing on paper with a pen and no one was reading what I had written anyway. This was a journal that was sitting in my desk draw when I wasn’t writing in it.

I hardly ever went back and read the journal myself. I knew what was written there, mostly. The very act of writing things down fixes them in my head in a different way than vague non-verbal thoughts that drift in and out of my consciousness.

I also started to use any paper that was at hand for the journal. I used scrap paper that had printing on one side and was blank on the back. I began to ad a lot more illustrations and drawings to the journal.

I had no idea of publishing, or any one’s interest in what I wrote in my journal. I had a kind of complete freedom. Worthless journal becomes priceless escape into literary freedom. But… freedom to do what?

Learn to write… for a start. Producing lots of words and sentences and paragraphs and pages can lead one to be able to repeat the acts easily and out of habit. I learned to ‘touch-type’ or whatever they call ‘not looking at the keyboard’ when typing. I was in high school when boys didn’t learn to type because that was a female secretary kind of thing. But I took the class in summer school with twenty-nine females. So, I can close my eyes and the words flow through my fingers at a pretty fast pace.

When I go to comment on some news story on some subreddit or other message board I will formulate a thought and type. I usually think I have a couple of sentences. When I look I usually have long paragraphs. And, I usually have more to say, and additional thoughts, and much to write.

By writing everyday in a journal I became accustomed to putting my thoughts into words and sentences and paragraphs in my head, and then on paper, or on a computer screen. I have no ‘block.’ Honestly, I can’t imagine having ‘writer’s block.’