Stephen Crowder’s contract is redpilling Normie Conservatives

I won’t go through the details of these two people, I assume that you are all intelligent enough or have some cursory knowledge to do so. Plus I can’t be stuffed doing days of research on a Jew and a Jew lover.

Steven Crowder received an offer to be a part of the Daily Wire, a “conservative” network of Youtubers which now includes token black Candice Owens and Jungian specialist Jordan “I can’t acknowledge The Jewish Question” Petersen. This offer was to be worth $50 million dollars. Except it would account for the following:

• Crowder would have to do 192 Episodes per year under the masthead of the Daily Wire plus other annual content as per the directives of DW.
• Merchandise would come under DW, as well as social media accounts and email lists. Said items can be managed and created and altered however the Daily Wire saw fit.

Crowder would go on to make a video stating his case. You can watch it if you want to, but I didn’t. I should like to note that my sources for this article are these videos and the voices inside my head.

Crowder doesn’t mention names, only the terms of the contract that he disagrees with. He goes out of his way to not mention who gave it to him, only stating that conservative content is being suppressed on behalf of Big Tech in the United States.

“It’s not the exception, it’s the rule,” according to Crowder’s own words. He then urged people to not sign contracts with the points mentioned above, being courteous enough to not mention who gave him the contract.

The comment under the video written by Crowder goes as follows, quote:

Now we know this to be fundamentally true, some of us knew for years and decades and we see it now with the cucking of people like Donald Trump and Tucker Carlson. But the deductions are what set things off in my mind (I am paraphrasing from the contract):

• If Crowder fails for any reason to deliver 192 episodes of his show, fails to do ad reads, promotion reads or doesn’t meet the satisfaction of the company, there will be a $100,000 deduction per instance and if he does not receive permission to miss an episode he will be deducted $100,000. This is in the daily content section.
• If Crowder fails to deliver monthly content in any month or any financial quarter, including any and all ad reads and promo reads or fails to satisfy the company, $250,000 will be deducted per instance.
• If he does not do the above mentioned for annual content in any year, he loses $1 million PER INSTANCE (all caps is my emphasis)

Bear in mind that all of these deductions are seperate from one another. So he could, in the span of a month, lose a sizeable amount of the $50 million. He states, categorically, that the demand for content is worse than the MSM sites such as MSNBC and CNN and Disney on top of the $100k per day loss of revenue if he had a sick day.

After all this, he emphasised revenue from adverts/platforms.

• His sum of $50 million will be axed by 25% if he loses over half of his advertising partners via boycott or they drop his program, and he has no replacement in 90 days. It would take away $12.5 million that would have covered his costs for workers/content, but the reduction remains in place until the new advert partners have stayed with him for a further 90 days. So in half a year, Crowder would have to work with 3/4ths of what he is owed if YouTube pulls the plug.

• If any major platform, Youtube included, issues a content strike/demonetisation, 25% reduction of the $50 million if it can’t be resolved within three months “from that point forward”. So there’s no indication of a return to the status quo, instead “from that point forward”.

• If Crowder is banned, then the $50 million is reduced based on the platform: YouTube 20%, Apple Podcast 20%, Facebook 10% and Spotify 10%.

He then goes on a diatribe about how conservatives who have greater wealth and power have done nothing to overcome Big Tech, highlighting his own struggles and stating that his show would be dead if it was “advertiser friendly”. Again, I have no love for him, but this whole drama is going to make waves amongst the normie conservatives. The failure of the centre-right gives way to far-right success.

Speaking of, the Daily Wire responded. Instead of going through it, I recommend Shad M. Brooks’ breakdown of the matter (Aussie Mormon who runs the normie YouTube channels Shadiversity and Knights Watch):

The comments are a better gauge of the conclusions reached. On the Daily Wire’s comments, there were condolences and urges for reconciliation, comparing the dispute to parents having an argument. Which is pretty gay and cringe when we’re dealing with the possibility of Jews trying to rip off a conservative content creator as well as entrench the values of the (((Establishment))). On Shad’s video on the matter, I picked a few comments that summed it up:

• The thing that irritates me most about the DW response is the constant statement of “he is set to make 50m dollars” which is patently untrue as he has to cover production costs which is ridiculous.

• Thanks to your breakdown I now know how bad the DW offer actually was. The responses Ben and Jeremy have made about Crowder are outrageous. Ben said that Steven betrayed the DW, Jeremy claimed his offer was reasonable. He told crowder in private that they offer much more unfair contracts to new unknown creators, calling them “wage slaves”. It’s like DW shat on crowders face and expected him to be grateful. I’m genuinely worried about the terms layer (sic) out in Jordan Peterson’s DW contract now because this is not an offer you send to a friend or someone you respect.

• I agree. I’ve been a fan of LwC for at least 7-8 years. Mug club member for two. Joined DW last spring. Love the work. HATE SCUMMY BUSINESS DEALS!! Everyone deserves an honest first offer, whether they can afford a lawyer to look it over or not. I get that Jeremy and Ben come from Hollywood,  and this crap is how Hollywood runs. But they are SUPPOSED to be doing better morally, and then turn around and bite when questioned or challenged.

Shad would then do a follow up called I’m sorry but Ben Shapiro is WRONG, reply to “My Response to Steven Crowder’s Despicable Betrayal”

Yes, “My Response to Steven Crowder’s Despicable Betrayal” was the title used by Ben Shapiro to respond to Crowder’s criticism. Because Crowder didn’t want to sign a contract. Wow.

I’ve seen Jewish chutzpah up close and then there’s this. The comments are beyond my understanding, as they take up DW’s side of the argument. Shad’s second video had one comment that struck:

It reminds me of Shapiro’s infamous interview with Andrew O’Neil, where O’Neil dodged the usual kosher trickery and struck Ben with his 2014 article on how Palestinians should be forcibly deported from Gaza and the West Bank. After failing to make his tricks stick, he immediately Shoah’d the interview:

The fact that this dispute has led to a circling of the wagons around Shapiro goes to show the futility of trying to go the normal route of “pwning da lefties”. It’s all a bunch of autism that is better used to troll the (((Establishment))) and to establish a new National Socialism/White Nationalism built off the nativism of our Australian ancestors and not off “SJW BEING DESTROYED BY FACTS AND LOGIC”.

This isn’t even touching the implications of Shapiro having a direct line to the CEO of YouTube or his demands to edit out a part of his show because he didn’t like a pansexual degenerate and didn’t want to affect his revenue. That is nepotism and manipulation in action. The words “Despicable Betrayal” being added to a simple disagreement only fuel a failing cause, while true nationalists like NSC-131 (and EAM in Australia) have done good work such as shutting down Drag Queen Story Hour events and confronting the globohomo narratives that plague the White Race.

The end result of all this is good and bad. Bad because people are being lured into this kosher kabuki theatre where we argue on metaphorical hills, such as a falling out between content creators. Meanwhile, the real hills to die on such as mass migration are ignored due to the innate idea of conservatism to say “well, aS lOnG aS tHeY cOmE hErE lEgAlLy AnD fOlLoW tHe LaW”.

I don’t imagine this will blow apart the fake and gay “conservatism” we’ve been forced to swallow, but given the last two months or so, it has managed to be a part of a great awakening of consumers who have realised how far they have been conned. Ben Shapiro backing away from Trump and J6, then came Petersen’s shilling for the Jews and the end of anonymity online and now Shapiro kvetching over the fact he can’t draw another sucker into his designs.

This entire farce proves that you cannot concede the point. You cannot give up your principles in regards to money, as the benefactors will show their true colours. I’ll end this with a quote from the infamous Hacker known as 4chan:

Subscribe to XYZ on Telegram, Bitchute, Twitter and Gab.