The Best Pro-White Social Network You’ve Never Heard Of

In early September, after posting a link to my BitChute channel on the social networking site VK, I was contacted by one of the folks in my friends list, Michael James (no relation to this author), and asked to check-out a pro-White video-sharing network called WTVideo. After asking a few questions and finding out that the site was part of a group of social media platforms owned and operated by two men with strong pro-White sympathies (Michael being one of them), I decided to check it out. I joined the main site,, introduced myself to Michael’s co-owner, Cozumel, and started posting. I liked what I saw, there was immediate feedback and a lot of interaction. So, after a few days I asked them if they’d like to do an interview to help get the word-out about their sites and explain what they are trying to do. Michael graciously accepted my invitation. We conducted this interview via email over an 18-day period beginning September 7, 2019.

Russell James: Sorry to be so late with this, but the tail-end of Hurricane Dorian is smacking northern New England right now, and we had a mini-emergency we had to deal with this morning.

Let’s get right into it, with the first question: To start, could you tell the readers a little about yourself?

Michael James: Basically, I am an average Joe is what some might think that would pass me by on the street or make casual small talk. Nothing could farther from the truth though; I work long hours on my IRL job and on my websites that promote freedom of speech even if I do not agree with that speech. I am divorced but have children that are grown now and I visit with them weekly.

RJ: How did you come to the conclusion that a social network that provided a platform for free speech was necessary?

MJ: Well, after seeing what other websites were doing to stifle any type of anti-establishment dissent for several years, I came to that conclusion, And that includes our video site as well, I personally have seen many times that “THEY” will deplatform or shadow ban people or groups that do not fit into the narrative they want projected which in my opinion is degeneracy.

RJ: What is your website and how does it work?

MJ: WorldTruth.MX (WT) is the website. We condone free speech, but I always tell people that we at WT do not protect someone from the consequences of that speech, so threats to staff or doxxing IRL is not tolerated. Perverse porn or underage porn is also not tolerated. We try to make the user experience pleasant for all members regardless of what country they come from.

RJ: How long has the site been up and running?

MJ: Since early 2012.

RJ: appears to be more than just a social networking site. It seems to be the heart of a social media platform with blogging, video-sharing, and other capabilities built-in. Can you tell us about your vision for the site and how these other platforms fit into that plan?

MJ: Growth at this point is my personal vision. Yes, we try [to] accommodate members with a full spectrum of luxuries so to speak and we will continue that approach of constant improvement. We are self-sustained because I do not care for big corporate funding that has wrecked sites as far as I can tell — a kind of FIRE AND FORGET atmosphere if you will. We interact daily with our member base and listen to what they would like to see as far as improvements to the platform. Sometimes it is feasible and other times it is not. We are going to be installing live-streaming capabilities [on the video-sharing site] real soon and the membership base is thrilled.

RJ: Which technologies do you use for the site?

MJ: PHP Fox that has been customized by our coder. [It’s] a bit fickle but seems to be the best choice for our platform presently.

RJ: Could you elaborate on why you chose PHP Fox? Which features or design choices appealed to you?

MJ: The gentleman that originally owned WT set it up with PHP Fox, I just adapted to it and our site tech is familiar with it since 2012 so I was not going to try and fix something that was not broken, It is a bit Finicky but makes a great site. The functionality is great and it can be customized without major headaches for the most part.

RJ: What is your technology background?

MJ: Mine is pretty much self-taught over the years. A little coding and just learning from trial and error as far as running the control panel on sites I have owned.

RJ: I’m a big fan of Free Software and I’ve written about it as a solution to Big Tech’s control over social media. Is there any chance you might switch to one of the Free Software social media apps (or some combination of them) like Diaspora*, Mastodon, or MediaGoblin?

MJ: I would consider it possibly but would have to look into them before making any kind of swap.

RJ: Switching from a social network in which you have invested a lot of time and energy to a new network is a hard sell. Which is the single biggest reason folks should make the switch from their current social network to WTMX?

MJ: We do not censor content unless it is degenerate kiddie porn or Hentai porn which in some countries are one and the same. Additionally, we have quite a bit to offer with the video site, documents, video chat, radio shows with Live streaming coming soon as well as a non-corporate
approach to running the site. We try to interact daily with members and ask them for input and our tech support is pretty good with helping members. So often on the larger sites tech support is dicey at

RJ: As you know I’ve been a fairly active member of the site for a couple of weeks now and as I’ve become more familiar with it I’ve really grown to like it, but I have one small complaint: in comparison
to big, well-funded sites, it can be bit sluggish at times. Have you or other users noticed this? If so, are there any plans to fix it?

MJ: Yes, we have noticed that issue. The larger sites have multiple servers and that costs money which, given the funding available to the larger sites, do not have a problem with finances. I am self-sustaining and will not acquire establishment funding because although it is helpful in a technical aspect it is not beneficial to members long term. We are trying different work-arounds [that] will hopefully cure that issue in the
near future — anything to keep from being a “CORPORATE” site is what we want to offer. Although even the larger corporate sites have issues from time to time.

RJ: Is there anything that members can do to help?

MJ: They do help quite often by buying Gold Memberships on WT.MX & WT.VID. Also some donate often and it helps with daily expenses. As far as helping with the site’s technical issues, most are pretty patient and understand we are working towards a smoother running site, and that is helpful.

RJ: Have you thought about switching to a distributed or peer-to-peer (P2P) model? BitChute does this, and the GNU Project offers a great P2P framework called GNUnet to help with the switch.

MJ: It might be something I would consider in the future.

RJ: WT has this interesting “pet” function, where other members can buy and sell you as a “pet,” can you tell us what it is and how it works?

MJ: Basically . . . it is for s**ts and giggles, Cozumel suggested it one day and to be honest I thought it was a bit silly but the members enjoy it quite a bit! You use points to turn into “CASH” so you have the money required to purchase another member as a pet, Or you can purchase freedom from being a pet. It is just for fun and sometimes it is quite hilarious. We strongly believe a bit of humor is a must in this madhouse world we live in.

RJ: How many members does WMTX have among all of your platforms?

MJ: We are at 1384 members on MX and 194 on the video site currently. (Interviewer’s note: as of today, October 16, 2019, there are 1,451 members on WTMX.)

RJ: That first number surprises me. The network is so active, I would have thought there were a lot more members. What are your plans to promote the site to help it grow?

MJ: Well, as you know, I put work in on other sites to get people to take a look at us. As far as mass marketing I have not really [gone] that route as yet because I feel it might be detrimental to the site by bringing in the wrong crowd. But I still put in work pretty much daily with invites to people that I believe would enjoy the site. People seem to get stuck on Facebook and getting them away from there is like pulling teeth, sadly enough.

RJ: It’s understandable why it’s hard to lure people away from Facebook. Most people aren’t political, and they just use FB to keep in touch with family and friends, so if your whole network of acquaintances is on a particular network it doesn’t do much good to be on another, but I think there’s an opportunity for WTMX to be the network for people who want to use social networking to get things done and are leery of the establishment’s Antarian censorship issues.

I think that about wraps this interview, do you have anything else you’d like to say to the readers?

MJ: I concur with that sentiment Russell. We will remain uncensored. Thanks again Russell.

15 replies
    • Stella Ash
      Stella Ash says:

      I have tried without success to find the site on DuckDuckgo search engine. It just does not come up. So I have to keep returning to your page to get onto the site.

  1. James A Bowery
    James A Bowery says:

    I can speak with authority in this area.

    The Information Centric Networking tsunami is upon us.

    See nformation Centric Wireless Networking with Edge Computing for 5G and IoT.

    Storage and distribution of content will be absorbed into the common carrier network infrastructure. Network effect monopolies, both actual and potential, must reorient from storage and distribution to filtering.

    See my 1982 essay “Videotex Networking and the American Pioneer“. In particular this passage:

    I firmly believe that, except to the extent that they have been silenced by the media’s endless barrage of feudalistic values, the American people are pioneers to their core. They are starved to share these values with each other but they cannot because there is no mode of communication that will support their values. Videotex may not be as efficient at replicating and distributing information as broadcast, but it does provide, for the first time in history, a means of removing the editorial monopoly from feudalists and allowing pioneers to share their own values. There will be a battle over this “privilege” (although one would think freedom of the press and speech should be rights). The outcome of this battle of editorial freedom vs. control in videotex may well determine whether or not civilization ends in a war over resources, continues with the American people spear-heading an explosion into the high frontier or, pipe-dream of pipe-dreams, slides into world-wide feudalism hoping to control nuclear arms and “equitably” distribute our dwindling terrestrial resources.

    There is a tremendous danger that careless promotion of deregulation will be dogmatically (or purposefully) extended to the point that there may form an unregulated monopoly over the information replicated across the nation-wide videotex network, now underdevelopment. If this happens, the prophecies of a despotic, “cashless-society” are quite likely to become a reality. My opinion is that this nightmare will eventually be realized but not before the American pioneers have had a chance to reach each other and organize. I base this hope on the fact that the first people to participate in the videotex network will represent some of the most pioneering of Americans, since videotex is a new “territory”.

    The question at hand is this: How do we mold the early videotex environment so that noise is suppressed without limiting the free flow of information between customers?

    The first obstacle is, of course, legal. As the knights of U.S. feudalism, corporate lawyers have a penchant for finding ways of stomping out innovation and diversity in any way possible. In the case of videotex, the attempt is to keep feudal control of information by making videotex system ownership imply liability for information transmitted over it. For example, if a libelous communication takes place, corporate lawyers for the plaintiff will bring suit against the carrier rather than the individual responsible for the communication. The rationalizations for this clearly unreasonable and contrived position are quite numerous. Without a common carrier status, the carrier will be treading on virgin ground legally and thus be unprotected by precedent. Indeed, the stakes are high enough that the competitor could easily afford to fabricate an event ideal for the purposes of such a suit. This means the first legal precedent could be in favor of holding the carrier responsible for the communications transmitted over its network, thus forcing (or giving an excuse for) the carrier to inspect, edit and censor all communications except, perhaps, simple person-to-person or “electronic mail”. This, in turn, would put editorial control right back in the hands of the feudalists. Potential carriers’ own lawyers are already hard at work worrying everyone about such a suit. They would like to win the battle against diversity before it begins. This is unlikely because videotex is still driven by technology and therefore by pioneers.

    The question then becomes: How do we best protect against such “legal” tactics? The answer seems to be an early emphasis on secure identification of the source of communications so that there can be no question as to the individual responsible. This would preempt an attempt to hold the carrier liable. Anonymous communications, like Delphi conferencing, could even be supported as long as some individual would be willing to attach his/her name to the communication before distributing it. This would be similar, legally, to a “letters to the editor” column where a writer remains anonymous. Another measure could be to require that only individuals of legal age be allowed to author publishable communications. Yet another measure could be to require anyone who wishes to write and publish information on the network to put in writing, in an agreement separate from the standard customer agreement, that they are liable for any and all communications originating under their name on the network. This would preempt the “stolen password” excuse for holding the carrier liable.

    Beyond the secure identification of communication sources, there is the necessity of editorial services. Not everyone is going to want to filter through everything published by everyone on the network. An infrastructure of editorial staffs is that filter. In exchange for their service the editorial staff gets to promote their view of the world and, if they are in enough demand, charge money for access to their list of approved articles. On a videotex network, there is little capital involved in establishing an editorial staff. All that is required is a terminal and a file on the network which may have an intrinsic cost as low as $5/month if it represents a publication with “only” around 100 articles. The rest is up to the customers. If they like a publication, they will read it. If they don’t they won’t. A customer could ask to see all articles approved by staffs A or B inclusive, or only those articles approved by both A and B, etc. This sort of customer selection could involve as many editorial staffs as desired in any logical combination. An editorial staff could review other editorial staffs as well as individual articles, forming hierarchies to handle the mass of articles that would be submitted every day. This sort of editorial mechanism would not only provide a very efficient way of filtering out poor and questionable communications without inhibiting diversity, it would add a layer of liability for publications that would further insulate carriers from liability and therefore from a monopoly over communications.

    In general, anything that acts to filter out bad information and that is not under control of the carrier, acts to prevent the carrier from monopolizing the evolution of ideas on the network.

    • Coz
      Coz says:

      Hey, we’re not ‘harvesting’ anything. We require a birthday for 2 reasons
      1, to make sure you’re legally able to view our content
      2, for birthday notifications and gifts on the site
      Use a fake one, we don’t care.

  2. Censored
    Censored says:

    “…we at WT do not protect someone from the consequences of that speech…”

    Unfortunate and careless utilisation of the terminology/phraseology of our enemy!

    What is he actually saying there? It is slightly ambiguous. Is he saying that they will dox you to the feds if requested, regardless of the legality of your material? Because that is the real issue.

    Perhaps just say: ‘We do not allow actual illegal content. Also we cannot necessarily protect you or guarantee your anonymity if you post material that arouses the interest/ire of jews, spooks, etc. and the federal government or one of the three letter scum-farms request your IP’.

    If you are here Mr. James, a little clarification would be appreciated.

    • Michael
      Michael says:

      Allow me to answer that question, First off take the actual context of what was being applied here on that particular question. If someone posts porn or threatens staff we ban that person..Hence the “PROTECTION” That some people have a tendency to abuse is null and void at that particular point and when they whine about being banned I ask them to reference what they had been told upon joining up.

    • Coz
      Coz says:

      To be clear we’re providing a service and we look after our members as much as possible, and that includes not co-operating with the feds etc if they come knocking. But if you hypothetically posted about committing a terrorist act then that’s free speech, but you’re not protected from any consequences of posting something like that, and we wouldn’t be able to protect you. TL;DR don’t be insane and you’ll be fine.

  3. Luke
    Luke says:

    I visited this website and noticed that there are a number of videos of Jordan Peterson posted.

    Does the owner and creator of not realize that Jordan Peterson is a tool who is working for the enemy, and he openly boasts that his objective is to discourage and influence young white men away from the Alt-Right and to keep them chained to the racially suicidal mindset that Whites should never, never, ever – think in racial terms, while every other
    race does exactly the opposite – and, because other races do think and behave tribally, they are kicking our butts in the process?

    I fully support the concept of a pro-white video uploading / streaming service being created and promoted – but, we have to be careful to not let our enemies use it to peddle the same kind of racially suicidal propaganda that we see on the mainstream media and on youtube.

    • Coz
      Coz says:

      Hi Luke, yes we know. We do our best to educate our members but some are still waking up and falling for the tools of the enemy, obviously free speech is our whole thing and while we won’t allow the enemy to subvert us we also need to balance that with allowing members to post what they like.

  4. Fenria
    Fenria says:

    Excellent forum. I’m on it, and I’m happy I found it. Thanks for creating a free speech platform for people who are experiencing a dearth of such things these days.

  5. iHanna
    iHanna says:

    The video site looks like Youtube. I like it. The main site requires a log in before you can see it; why is that? Why are you using a Mexico TLD?

    I am interested. Just a few questions since we are living in volatile times.
    I do worry, like most people who are watching intently, as world events unfold that are not conducive to freedoms we used to take for granted.

    What is your response to this video that was posted on your video site that is derogatory towards your site?

    I have saved the video blog but am leery of signing up for the main site when I can’t see it.

    • mike
      mike says:

      For privacy reasons is why we don’t allow people to “SEE IN” on the main site, Most of our members would not like that whatsoever, As far as the video it was a blatant corporate attack from a competitor that started the minute they joined up and the Woman doing the video is dubious at best, Before she became a corporate troll for hire she was promoting jewish mysticism and polyamory, A simple google will verify these things.

  6. max
    max says:

    I signed up for the website and there is way to much NS stuff in there. If there is to be any sort of reasonable dissident right platform then free speech is not the way to go because the quality of the discourse goes down to the lowest common denominator. A good start would be to ban all the porn, gore, NS crap along with any fed posting. And then we might start having a reasonable platform for connecting with like minded people.

Comments are closed.