The fact alone that they are banning "content" (it was just a harmless title and a pic) about private property in this period is not a coincidence. There was n

The fact alone that they are banning "content" (it was just a harmless title and a pic) about private property in this period is not a coincidence. There was no way to link that title "Boston Basic Income #98: Karl Widerquist on Private Property" to any violation of the law. I think they are just scared that in this period, talking about private property will bring people to uprise/unite to stop paying rents. YouTube is still part of the capitalist system and will do its part to protect it. And nobody is talking about this kind of censorship.