I would get banned if I had a black stooge behind me being my total cuck and I called him the black version of "toilet complexioned cave beast", like Gazi does.

Cynthia G, Gazi Kodzo and others do those kinds of shit anti white videos.

Youtube Video

YouTube didn't have a problem with this woman's videos either, until she was arrested and the court told them to close her channel.

YouTube sees no problem with black people being racist toward whites.   Black Hitler, Cynthia G and all manner of channels are filled with blacks being extremely racist against whites and YouTube defends the content.

Jack Dorsey (Twitter founder) defends banning for racism, but defends allowing anti white racism to remain.

Facebook has a similar policy.

Social media is run by well known liberals.

+++++

As for the video on my channel, someone had to flag it as racism/hate speech.    I doubt it's a conservative who did it.

YouTube has an algorithm that only checks for copyrighted material from businesses who pay for the service.     You get a copyright strike and a completely different email for that.

Terrence doesn't care if you post his videos as long as you don't monetize them.

I suspect that YouTube does very little independent evaluation if the video is flagged and could be considered racist.  I suggest you flag Black hitler or one of the others and see what happens.

Jack Dorsey (Twitter founder) defends banning for racism, but defends allowing anti white racism to remain.

Facebook has a similar policy.

Social media is run by well known liberals.

+++++

As for the video on my channel, someone had to flag it as racism/hate speech.    I doubt it's a conservative who did it.

YouTube has an algorithm that only checks for copyrighted material from businesses who pay for the service.    You get a copyright strike and a completely different email for that.

Terrence doesn't care if you post his videos as long as you don't monetize them.

My YouTube channel got a community guideline strike over a video I mirrored by Terrence Williams.

YouTube said that the video was "racist hate speech".

A black man being highly critical of BLM is "racist hate

Thanks for providing the link.  I actually watched the entire video.
Call me an elitist, but I find these YouTube videos of random people speaking their minds a waste of time. Irregardless of content, even if the person in question was reciting my personal creed and philosophy of life. I just think there are better ways to seek out others opinions, including messaging boards, where some degree of interaction is possible.

Now down to your issue.  I am confused.  How does YouTube take down your video, but leave up the same one on a different channel?
I also think they may have been unfair in taking it down, but you are unfair on blaming it on liberals.  Their terms of service state:

Hate speech

We encourage free speech and try to defend your right to express unpopular points of view, but we don't permit hate speech.

Hate speech refers to content that promotes violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on certain attributes, such as:

race or ethnic origin
religion
disability
gender
age
veteran status
sexual orientation/gender identity
There is a fine line between what is and what is not considered to be hate speech. For instance, it is generally okay to criticize a nation-state, but not okay to post malicious hateful comments about a group of people solely based on their ethnicity."

I don't think he was promoting hate, but he certainly was highly critical of black Americans and purposefully grouped them all together in a non-stop string of stereotypes that I imagine offends a lot of people, For you to defend this diatribe as a criticism of the BLM movement is disingenuous, He spent more time gnawing on that drumstick of fried chicken than he did talking about BLM.

Now we come to the "shoe on the other foot test" and I will extend you the courtesy of not assuming the answer.  If we were to take a transcript of the video and give it a white man to act out and recite, would it be considered hate speech?

"Present company" excepted, I think there are may out there who would see this video as a validation of their own racist views because they are spoken by a black man.

I think for those reasons you got dinged, but I don't understand why it is still up on another part of the site.

I also want to say how much more enjoyable and USEFUL today was on the forum.

Many of us would like to get back to the vibe of those earlier days on Politics & Debate, when thread titles didn't include screaming obscenities, and no one spam-posted (whether through a dozen flimsy new threads in a row, or six consecutive self-replies in an author's single thread).

We hope today's approach gets more time to take root.

It's a real step up, where debate can be pointed – even blunt -- and intellectually challenging, yet not off-color or deliberately nonsensical.  And sometimes, a bit of fun for fun's sake.  Still some work to be done keeping threads on topic, but overall, today was a hopeful reminder of the early forum's original strengths, and how it could/should be once more.   :cool2:

What bothers me is that it's a black man being critical of BLM and YouTube deemed the vide to be "racist hate speech".

Here's the video on another channel since YouTube deleted mine;

Youtube Video

I can find many videos of him criticizing Black Lives Matter on YouTube right now.  Was there anything exceptional about your video?

Yes, raphjd, it would give us a better picture to know exactly which of his speeches was "downvoted" to such an extent on your channel.  Anywhere we can view the one in question?