Free Republic mentioned in "Chronicles" magazine article.

Chronicles, A Magazine of American Culture ^ | Dec 1, 2002 | Sean Scallon

[Marine Inspector]

PALEOCONSERVATIVES often refer to "the limits of permissible dissent" in describing the struggle to hold on to their views in the realms of the media and academia against the censure of both the left and the "mainstream" right. Now, this struggle has been extended into the realm of the internet, the supposed last frontier of unregulated speech and capitalism. Indeed, we may be witnesses, as Frederick Jackson Turner would say, to the closing of this frontier, not just because of the collapse of the dot-com economy but because of the new limits imposed on speech and content, which will only become more pronounced as the War on Terrorism progresses.

In 1996, Fresno, California, resident and internet surfer Jim Robinson had a problem: His posts on Prodigy message hoards and chat rooms, particularly his strong criticisms of President Bill Clinton, were being censored by Prodigy's administrators. So he started his own web site—Free Republic (www.freerepublic.com).

Free Republic was more than just an ordinary message board in the early settlement of the internet. Surfers could post whole articles from publications and make them topics of discussion and debate. And it was more than just another chat room. Free Republic’s likeminded members could be connected from across the country to organize activist projects and events. ln 1998, when many Republicans wanted to ignore Kenneth Starr’s report on the Clinton scandals rather than deal with its charges, Free Republic members (or "Freepers," as they call themselves) lit up the congressional phones and organized demonstrations that influenced Republicans in the House to vote for articles of impeachment. And it was the Freepers, not the GOP, who organized the demonstrations of conservatives down in Florida during the 2000 presidential vote recount.

Over 60,000 people have been registered members of Free Republic, the largest conservative-oriented website in the world. Members are a diverse lot: independents, Republicans, libertarians, (large "L" and small), neocons, paleocons, Buchanan Brigaders, Keyes supporters and everything in between. Even such prominent pundits as Justin Raimondo, Ann Coulter, Barbara Olson, and Lucianne Goldberg (known by her Freeper handle, "Trixie") have made frequent posts.

As in any frontier boomtown, however, with rapid growth came predictable problems. Some of the articles posted on the site came from racist or antisemitic web sites. Conspiracy theorists also made use of Free Republic. Leftists began to infiltrate the site, posting articles or posing as conservatives to act as agents provocateurs. "Vanity posts" became more frequent, and flame wars among members became more intense, as the site split into factions during the 2000 presidential election. Overall, civility degenerated. Some members became concerned that Free Republic had become a virtual hangout for kooks. Matters came to a head in early 2000 when Robinson (or "JimRob") speculated on George W. Bush’s connection to the airport in Mena, Arkansas where drug and gun-running allegedly took place during the 1980’s. Matt Drudge then dropped Free Republic’s link from the Drudge Report, and Goldberg took 2.000 members with her to start her own Lucianne.com.

Robinson decided to clean up his website and, like any good sheriff, deputized a posse of site moderators to remove offensive posts, threads, and articles and to ban those who posted them. But they did not stop there. Soon, they had banned the posting of any articles from certain websites that they deemed taboo, such as VDare.com ("too divisive"), LewRockwell.com, DixieNet.org (the League of the South’s website) , and the Free State Project’s website (www.FreeStateProject.org)

It would be easy to conclude that Robinson and his monitors simply went overboard in an effort to clean up the excesses of Free Republic, but there is more to it than that.

Because of its significant growth, Free Republic costs $240,000 annually to maintain. As a non-profit, Free Republic depends on donors, large and small, for its survival. No doubt the embarrassment of being dropped from the Drudge Report and Goldberg’s public break with the site concerned Robinson, and lie feared that funds might dry up if his site were perceived to he on the fringe. In addition, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times sued Free Republic for copyright infringement. The case was settled out of court. It was only natural for Robinson and his site administrators to want to look good for prospective donors.

With so many posters banned, the diversitv of thought on Free Republic has been reduced to the musings of neoconservatives, Zionists, Republicans who act is if Free Republic were an annex of GOP headquarters, those who consider George W. Bush a demigod and offer daily prayers to him, and other sycophants and cheerleaders, Robinson has made it clear where he stands: "I see that the only Party capable of blocking arid defeating the evil Democrats is the Republican Party. I see that many races are so close hat as little as a one percent siphon of conservative votes to a third party could be the difference between success and failure. I see allowing a Democrat to remain in power when it could have been prevented as a triumph of evil."

Many banned Freepers have turned to such sites as Liberty Post (www.libertypost.org) and Liberty Forum (www.libertyforum.org) where members can post articles from anywhere and comment without interference from the thought police or fear of Siberian banishment. But Free Republic will still remain the 800-pound gorilla of conservative websites for some time, just as National Review has been for conservative magazines, despite being watered down. Frontiers, whether on land or in cyberspace, cannot survive when developers start plotting out the fencerows.

—Sean Scallon

[ganesha]

They can claim to have the entire population of China registered there but if 90 percent of the posts are by the same handful of people then for all practical purposes it's still 20 idiots.

[Hoppean]

These people like to think of themselves as better--more enlightened--than the "masses" and if something is popular, that tells them it's no good. That way they don't have to overextend their meager intellects to actually judge for themselves the worthiness of anything. It doesn't take intelligence to be a cynic.

You are correct that using such a simple rule-of-thumb such as "if it's popular, it's no good" can be problematic, but I think the spirit of your comment goes a bit far in the other direction--the direction of majoritarianism.

Truth isn't determined by majorities, and one has to admit that the masses are pretty vulgar, even by the traditional standards of what constitutes mass vulgarity historically. I need only point to the baseness, and popularity, of cultural products like MTV's programming.

Conservatism has always been skeptical of the masses, and that can be found in texts like Ortega y Gasset's Revolt of the Masses. Of course, we live in an age where even conservatism has been watered-down and corrupted by mass culture. Some might say evidence of that can be found at Free Republic. ;)

[stands2reason]

You are correct that using such a simple rule-of-thumb such as "if it's popular, it's no good" can be problematic, but I think the spirit of your comment goes a bit far in the other direction--the direction of majoritarianism.

Hardly. I only made the point that judgment should rely on the facts, not whether something is too "popular" or not. Popularity does not make any idea true or false, per se.

[comwatch]

Sad but true... how often do serious issues, say INS corruption, garner 350 or so posts. How typical of Freeperdom's Keyboard Warriors... attack the messenger when they don't like the message. I suspect most couldn't carry Marine Inspector's lunch let alone walk a mile in his shoes. I see this post has be moved to "to backroom", whatever that is. It sure as hell isn't the front lines.  For all the crowing about victory, perhaps they should discuss California's 2002 election outcome. Meanwhile, I'd rather WORK on INS-Gate than read more bashing of a true patriot.  Now ban me again for being a "disruptor"!!

[farmfriend]

I didn't know Snow Bunny was banned. Without having to read this entire thread, can someone enlighten me as to why? It says she was banned in 12-2000 but I could have sworn I've looked up her profile page since then.

[comwatch]

Still no proof but lots of backpedalling.

Why would you want to confuse this intellectual discussion with something so bland as the truth. lol

[veronica]

Well, let's see. We kicked out the anti-Semites, the racists, the bigots, the tin-foil hat conspiracy nuts, the America did it crowd, the cowardly anti-war America haters, the America got what she deserves crowd, the DU disruptors, the perverts, the religion bashers, the Bush is a Nazi crowd, the Bush did it crowd, the it's all about oil crowd, the I'd rather support Clintonites crowd, the foul mouthed bashers, the smash mouth bashers, the just can't seem to get along with anyone crowd, the I hate everyone crowd, the naysayers, the doom and gloom sky is falling crowd, the woe is me we're all doomed crowd, etc, etc, etc.

Hee hee - well-put.... and a good list of people to usher out the door.

We supported the GOP and we kicked Democrat butt. We helped establish Republican control of both houses of Congress along side a Republican President for one of the very few times in modern history. We helped set the stage to begin replacing liberal activist judges with conservative judges.

Right on. :)

[Demidog]

and a good list of people to usher out the door.

Amazing that you're still here then isn't it?

[veronica]

Bump.

[dcwusmc]

Marine Inspector bump. Semper fi!

[Cachelot]

Amazing that you're still here then isn't it?

Geez. Da dog. Amazing that you're not over at LibertyForum, where every second poster now seems to have an avatar with a swastika on it, or a posse membership, or a membership in The American Nazi party.

Interesting times, odie - that's all I can say ;)).

[Cachelot]

I believe that LF has over 1100 registered users now.

Hehehehehe. Like Matthias Giwer?

LF was an antisemitic kook board from the start, and you'll have difficulty making the case that this was not by design. It has now come out of the closet to the extent that folks are bragging of their Stormfront membership, decorating themselves with swastikas and lurching between frothing screams that the holocaust didn't happen and frothing screams about needing to have another try at it.

Purely appropriate company for you.

[Demidog]

You're a blatant liar. But that's nothing new.

[Cachelot]

You're a blatant liar

What lie, doggie? You'll have to point it out, I'm afraid.

Lol. The truth is out, cur :)).

[Demidog]

LF was an antisemitic kook board from the start

This is a lie. It didn't start out as an "antisemitic kook board" [sic] nor is it that today.

[Demidog]

LF was an antisemitic kook board from the start

This is a lie. It didn't start out as an "antisemitic kook board" [sic] nor is it that today.

[Cachelot]

This is a lie. It didn't start out as an "antisemitic kook board"

Oh, but it did. It was deliberately seeded with antisemites and nazists during the "invite only" phase. That was done by administrators like Texoma and JustStopIt, by Saudi ops like Kudzu, and several others - like the "Sheik of Springdale", seemingly a fellow with a criminal past. The "invitees" during that period included luminaries like "The_Skunk" and "iron8webmaster" (realname Matthias Giwer, who you can find out everything about with a simple search).

nor is it that today.

Oh goody. Old fleabag goes straight in the quicksand - again :). Here ya go, just a few examples fresh. Enjoy.

madrussian (extremist) 11/25/02 08:08 PM	Re: The Doctor Is In: Holocaust Questions Answered Here  [ To: demidog  |  Post 332820, reply to 332573 ] (Score: 2)
	Arator's views are largely congruent with Jewish ones. Making statistical observations isn't ignorant, it's scientific and objective. The "I know a Jew who's different" defense has been tried and refuted over and over again. Are you ready to formulate your objection in statistical terms?
GROUCHOTWO (extremist) 11/25/02 06:46 AM	Re: Majdanek gas chamber  [ To: madrussian  |  Post 332105, reply to 332088 ] (Score: 2)
	Well now that the little bugger has been caught before he got the prize, it has been hard to to track his little jewish roots. So far they have not disappeared earlier pics of this cute little frizzy haired, big-nosed whiz kid backed by influential Bertram. Hey, MR, I have reached the stage where I think it is reasonable for these dual loyalty jews to start proving to the rest of us whether or not they belong in jail or out of the country. Screw this crap. Sooner or later they better start explaining why the hell they are creating chaos in this country. Edana (radical) 11/25/02 04:08 AM	Re: Majdanek gas chamber  [ To: thoughtcriminal  |  Post 331943, reply to 331941 ] (Score: 1)
Actually, I have repeatedly stated my position on Jews, to the point of it being tiresome. The genetic makeup of the Ashkenazi Jew doesn't matter. His tribe and culture are exclusive and hostile to traditional gentile european culture, which is why Jews will never be accepted into WN.    What is White Nationalism?
Aryana (tyro) 11/24/02 11:11 PM	Re: Hitler's Observations on Jewish Debaters & Organized Jewry  [ To: ValleyForge  |  Post 331609, reply to 331596 ] (Score: 1)
	ValleyForge: Quote: Whether the debate concerns Israeli involvement in 911, the Holocaust, the Isreali-Palestinian conflict, Jewish control of the mass media, or just the Jewish question in general, it's always the same thing. I assume you're familiar with the research into Jewish group evolutionary strategies done by Dr. Kevin McDonald? He claims that the exceptional average verbal IQ of Jews allows them great ability for deception.    And they said nothing, for fear of the Jews........or did they? White Nationalists are those who struggle to preserve White race and culture. Join us!
ValleyForge (radical) 11/24/02 10:47 PM	Re: Hitler's Observations on Jewish Debaters & Organized Jewry  [ To: Medieval  |  Post 331573, reply to 331540 ] (Score: 2, Informative)
	Quote: You admire Mein Kampf? My position on Mein Kampf is a reasonable one. Namely, I think it's possible that Hitler was wrong about some things and right about others. The people that think Hitler was 100% wrong about everything he ever said and wrote are the ones that are being unreasonable - not to mention irrational.

[Demidog]

Oh, but it did. It was deliberately seeded with antisemites and nazists during the "invite only" phase.

Liar.

The fact that some post over there that MAY be anti-semitic is not an indication that the board itself is dedicated to anti-semitism. It is a board which allows free speech and that is what it is dedicated to promoting. I know that makes you uncomfortable but tough shit.

[Demidog]

By the way, if you posted a graphic that said "Jewish Pride World Wide" you would be the first to scream "anti-Semite" at anyone who objected.

Hey, which one of you ADL seminar posters is posing as Dr. Mathis?

[Cachelot]

The fact that some post over there that MAY be anti-semitic is not an indication that the board itself is

At the end of the "invite only" phase, four grotesque antisemites between them had more than 50% of all posts ever posted on the place. And I'm not even including Skunkie in that figure.

The place is, and was, a neo-nazi hangout. You know it, I know it, the rest of the world (literally) knows it.

Interesting times, doggie :).