Questions from a friend, part one. The questions.
Over the past couple of years I have been asked the same sort of questions from a number of people about my views on a variety of issues. Those questions range from, ‘why are you anti-Zionism’ to ‘what genocide do you mean’. This was from a YouTuber who objected to me wearing a t-shirt that read ‘Stop Genocide’. When I replied ‘all genocide’ he looked at me like I’d destroyed his argument with some magical powers. He tried to recover his position by asking me if I was against the genocide in Nigeria? I explained that as far as I am aware the situation in NIgeria does not meet the three criteria to be classified as a genocide but that if it were to in the furture, then yes. I would obviously be against it. I added that I was against violence against any living being.
He drifted away still looking at me as if I was some kind of mystic.
That’s the difference between most You-Tubers and journalists. The latter are held accountable and are expected to verify what they right. The majority of You-Tubers rely on their subscribers having no interest in facts.
Moral outrage is their hook. Ignorance their line and fear is their sinker.
I on the other hand am constantly asked to provide evidence of any assertion I make. I have previously responded by providing my source, I always go to the source. A google search is not research. What I found though was the response to providing evidence was usually to accuse me of being anyone or more of the following:
Anti-semite (Something I've felt is actually quite difficult for someone with Jewish ancestry)
Stooge of Putin.
Schill for Farage.
Fascist.
Communist.
Liberal.
Marxist.
Racist.
White poverty tourist.
Liar.
AI
Nazi puppet.
Traitor.
A variety of expletives.
So I stopped responding and now use the tags #dontbelievewhatisayresearchwhatisay and #agooglesearchisnotresearch. Let them work it out!
I seem to be triggering people on both sides of the political divide and I’ve had death threats from MAGA members in the US as well as far right wing AND anti racism groups in the UK and that tells me I’m performing the task of a Gonzo Journalist perfectly. Gonzo journalism isn't about balance, it's about facts. Balance is something mainstream media made up to ensure they keep us distracted from the fact that, for the vast majority of the planet, life continually gets tougher while the ultra rich get richer.
Ask yourself this question. What do you use to balance a fact? A lie?
I should point out that I see mainstream media in the same light as I do YouTubers.
The vast majority are broadcasters, actors reading from a script, seeking to divide the population by stoking fear and division. Begging for likes and funding.
I’m self funded and I rely on my content to convince people to follow and subscribe to my online platforms.
Besides, the term ‘author’ doesn't sound right unless you prefix it with struggling !
There is an investment opportunity on my website www.thegonzojournalist.com but it does potentially offer a good return.
Something I heard a lot growing up in South Africa, ‘nothing for mahala’. Nothing for nothing.
I can also point out that not one of my internationally published articles has led to me being required to issue a redaction, correction nor apology.
Not many mainstream outlets can say the same.
Let's get back to those questions.
The motivation behind this article came from a long message I received from a dear friend who has recently expressed a set of views that are about as opposite to mine as is possible.
That is absolutely fine with me.
The downfall of humanity may well be the current trend of automatically taking offence to and expressing outrage at anything or anyone who says something that doesn't fit our own world view.
Humans seem to have forgotten that you can disagree with someone without having to declare your horror at what they have said.
Voltaire is often credited, erroneously, with proclaiming,’ I disapprove of what you say but I defend to the death your right to say it’.
I support this statement, by Evelyn Beatrice in her 1906 book The friends of Voltaire, absolutely.
People consider me a free speech absolutist but I disagree. Free speech is either absolute, or it is censorship.
The redefining of free speech into a number of categories is one of many occasions where the media has taken a principle and diluted it. Deliberately.
Orwell called it newspeak.
I am a fan of comedian Jimmy Carr but I disagree with his recent statement that ‘we have free speech, but we are not free of the consequences of what we say’.
If speech has a consequence then it's not free speech. It's being censored. It is illogical and incorrect to say that we have free speech if we then jail people for saying the things they say, regardless of how distasteful it may be to the majority of the public today. Opinions change. Opinions are based on perspective and like arseholes, we all have our own opinion.
By defining one set of values as hate speech, mainstream simply created another reason to hate people.
Hating someone's opinion, that's fine.
Hating a person because of their opinion, that’s insane.
It's brainwashing. Its ideological identity.
It's divide and conquer.
Unfortunately a significant proportion of society treat virtue signalling as an olympic sport.
To make matters worse, society has also had its backbone metaphorically removed and as a result, many people now practice self censorship for fear of being cancelled!
We have become compliant, docile,easy to frighten and even easier to control.
Somehow society thinks it's normal to complain that we have lost our right to free speech and in the next breath, demand that someone be sacked because of something they said!
To quote another comedian, Australian Steve Hughes, ‘if you think you can live in a democracy without hearing something that upsets you from time to time, you’re fucking stupid!’.
More power to your elbow mate!
Anyway, back to me dear friend’s message which asked me to help them understand my perspective by clarifying why feel the way I do about somethings, explaining why I have currently focus on specific geo political events over others and specifically, why I believe that the current Israeli government is committing a genocide of the Paestinian people.
The message was a long one and so obviously written from a perspective of wanting to understand that I replied that I would answer her points in the form of an article.
I feel that not only will this give me a better opportunity of answering her questions fully and honestly but that it may also be of interest to other people being asked similar questions.
I also dislike using messaging apps for anything longer than a few words and I want my response to be well thought out and as detailed as possible. These are quite profound questions and I have too much respect for my friend, and myself, not to give her questions the attention they deserve. I'm not looking to change her mind.
We are only responsible for our own thoughts and opinions.
The questions my friend asked me are:
Why am I anti zionist ?
Do I truly believe that Israel should be eliminated from the world map and become an Islamic state and where do I think the Christian and Jewish people should go as they wouldn’t survive in an Islamic state? Iran was cited as an example.
Why do I think a genocide is being committed by the Israeli state?
Why do I say that Israel is an apartheid state?
Why not focus on Nigeria, Iran and Congo as well?
She also expressed her devastation over ‘the lack of empathy for the destruction that started in Israel on October the 7th and the absolute lies told thereafter.
The second part of this article, My reply, will be published on Friday the 21st of August, 2026.