Gregg Valentino’s War On Censorship And Political Correctness
Gregg Valentino and Vlad Yudin debate censorship in bodybuilding, on social media, and in politics.
Gregg Valentino has always been known for his vocal opinions. He was labeled the Ramblin’ Freak and has told a wide variety of stories that showcase an underground world most people don’t see in every day life. In recent years, Gregg has seemed more vocal about censorship and even more vocal about politics directly as we head closer to the presidential election. In our latest GI Exclusive interview, Gregg Valentino details his increased efforts against censorship of all sorts – in bodybuilding, online, and in politics.
With the presidential election fast approaching, the country has been in a seemingly year long argument. Never before have politics invaded all aspects of life. Gregg Valentino is noticing this too. But this speaks less about politics with a capital P and more about morality, ideology, and censorship.
Gregg Valentino believes that we are headed towards a world without free speech. He believes the Democratic party will take us there. But beyond that, he also feels that left leaning business such as Facebook, Google, Twitter, and YouTube will also bring a removal of free speech.
It’s no secret that Gregg Valentino has been vocal about taboo subjects throughout his career. He has always been vocal about steroids and other performance enhancing drugs. He’s always felt like freedom of speech, even about dangerous drugs, is important and should not be censored.
But long gone are the wild west days of the internet. Gregg is noticing more than ever that big online business that deal with public forums are controlling who gets to say what. YouTube can demonetize and suppress videos that don’t say the “right” things. Facebook fact checks posts and removes them – but who is fact checking the fact checkers? Twitter does the same.
While this argument is larger than Gregg Valentino himself as people both sides of the aisle make cases for and against these policies, it appears that personally Gregg has had enough.
He has been more vocal about censorship and more willing to discuss politics in recent years. That’s why Vlad Yudin decided to talk in detail about this change in his public stories. What unfolds is a debate about where the line should be drawn. Can completely open free speech be taken advantage of by propaganda and manipulators? And who should regulate that and stop it from happening? When does regulation become censorship against free speech?
It’s a grey area or perhaps a maze with no easy way out. For Gregg Valentino, he believes in letting everything be wild, open, and free. Let the people decide what is right and what is wrong. Gregg has faith in the intelligence of people. He thinks that propaganda would be caught by the masses. That true evil will be seen and vanquished by the public at large.
That’s how he’s always felt about steroids in bodybuilding. He’s just now widening his conversation to the entire country and politics in general.
You can watch Gregg Valentino’s full comments on censorship, political correctness, and politics in our latest GI Exclusive interview segment above.
- I'll likely get some flak for this, but I think some people don't fully understand the law on freedom of speech. The First Amendment reads:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
It means specifically when talking about free speech: Congress shall make no law .. abridging the freedom of speech .. which means that the government is prohibited by the Constitution on making any laws that would hinder or cut short free speech. When you talk about a private company, there is nothing in the Constitution that says they can't censor something. A private company isn't Congress or the government, and they aren't making a law.
When it comes down to the issue of censorship, because of the First Amendment of the Constitution, Congress whether run by Democrats or Republicans cannot step in and dictate that a private company can or cannot censor. It's simply prohibited for them to make such a law concerning free speech because even though you might say you're ensuring the free dissemination of ideas on a social network, to force them not to censor OR to censor is against the company's right of freedom of speech. Make sense? This is the basic originalist interpretation of the law. (We have created other laws to protect children and minors, but I'm not addressing all the complexities in the scope of this reply and setting them aside.)
If we are indeed headed towards a world without free speech, it will be because the government tries to make a law regarding free speech that infringes on one or more parties (even though it may look like it is beneficial for other parties), ignoring the First Amendment of the Constitution.
Even though platforms like Facebook, Google, Twitter, and YouTube may censor, remember who accesses these platforms. These businesses feel they have a duty to protect their users similar to how your regular network television stations regulate their content for younger viewers, no profanity, nudity, etc. You'll notice that cable networks have chosen to allow more adult content, especially during certain times. This is their choice allowed by their freedom of speech. This is also why many discussion boards such as MC exist to talk about steroids and other performance enhancing drugs--important information that I agree shouldn't be censored--again it's by choice. We may be unhappy with these platforms' censorship, but they are allowed such under our laws, just as our discussion boards are allowed not to censor. Perhaps someone should create similar platforms to these companies that don't censor to compete with them. There's a thought.