Is Substack Siding With Oppressors?

What is your definition of oppression?

Sharon Hurley Hall wrote a Substack article today. She seems to have the perspective of someone who has lived a cushy life, though I highly doubt she’d say that was the case. Just read the Substack article and you’ll see her complaining about how horrible it is in Substack Notes.

The One Where I Got Trolled On Substack Notes

But that’s the point. If Substack Notes is the horrible thing you’re going to complain about, then everyone who knows Substack Notes isn’t hell on earth is going to see you as having a pretty comfortable life.

Ever notice that people who are actually going through horrible things in life (that we would all agree are horrible) aren’t usually on social media complaining about it while it’s happening? They have more pressing matters to attend to. And if they are on social media, they are usually complaining after the event happened, not during it.

Sharon complained in a Substack Slack (according to her article) “As one of the people most affected by last weekend's sh*tshow, I don't think Hamish's statement is definitive enough. I'd love to see his stated personal values reflected in the company's values. Instead, it puts the burden of dealing with bigotry largely on individuals who are already experiencing trauma. I certainly feel unprotected and unsafe.”

I added a bold emphasis to the quote. Yes. Yes, it does put the burden, or let’s say responsibility, onto the individual. That’s the point. As I wrote about earlier when you have the responsibility, you have the power and you have freedom.

---

So Substack, as a company, is allowing people to take personal responsibility (the burden) to control what they see and don’t see, rather than trying to moderate it all themselves. Good.

Mirrors

Here is another comment Sharon made in the Substack Slack: “By failing to put some guardrails in Substack signals that this kind of hate is ok (silence showing you side with the oppressor and that sort of thing).”

Who is the oppressor? Is Substack actually siding with oppressors? What is the definition of oppression? It has to do with being weighed down by an “unjust or cruel exercise of authority or power.”

Wouldn’t Substack censoring people be oppressing them? Why is Substack not censoring people considered oppression?

I would be remiss to not point out the term DARVO, just in case you’ve never heard of it. From Wikipedia “DARVO (an acronym for "deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender") is a reaction that perpetrators of wrongdoing, such as sexual offenders may display in response to being held accountable for their behavior. Some researchers indicate that it is a common manipulation strategy of psychological abusers.”

I’m not accusing Sharon of being a psychological abuser, but to suggest that the oppressor is the victim and the victim is the oppressor is an abuser’s tactic. And she may be in an echo chamber with abusers hearing these talking points, so it’s only natural that people in that echo chamber would pick up on it and identify with that point of view.

To someone like Sharon, feeling oppressed by people exercising their freedom of speech, I would say, “By caring what those others are saying, you are making yourself a wilful slave to them.” When you stop caring about what other people say or do, you become free. It is in your power to stop caring what they are saying or doing. The only person who offends us is ourselves because of our beliefs.

The Real Reason You’re Offended

It is amazing to think that the people who want to oppress others actually think they’re the victims. They have all the power right now to stop caring, but they want to complain. I know people like Sharon will not accept what’s said here, they won’t accept the freedom that is so readily available to them.

You don’t need to share this with them. I just find it interesting that their minds are so twisted they think bad is good and good is bad and will reject any freedom that could be had.