Posted on 06/25/2019 1:07:05 PM PDT by Mount Athos
David French and his fellow peacetime conservatives are at it again, wringing their hands and gnashing their teeth as U.S. Senator Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) takes a run at curtailing the immense power of Big Tech.
As French channels Neville Chamberlain, the fact is that unless the tech companies are forcefully confronted, now, in the immediate, our self-governing republic will be over in less than a generation and we will be ruled by a tech oligarchy.
French and his types sputter that this is outrageous, that government shouldn’t be involved in curtailing the harmful behavior of private companies. First, we would do well to remember that roughly 20 years ago, Washington, D.C. created this problem by carving out the Section 230 exemption for neutral platforms online. Only a fool would think that the tech companies are neutral platforms today. They have, by their own distinct decisions, become publishers and telecommunications companies: if you are making publishing decisions, if you are deploying broadband, if you are creating and streaming live content, you are a publisher or a telecommunications company, and sometimes both.
As these companies have changed of their own volition, Washington, D.C. has continued to live under the happy fiction that they are still nothing more than neutral platforms. What do policymakers not understand? Why are they so blind? Perhaps re-election campaign money, perhaps organizations like National Review being bought off by tech company donations—who can really say? There are all sorts of reasons why we’re in defiance of common sense, but it doesn’t remove the fact that we are.
Ask yourselves why these companies get to play by one set of rules while publishers and telecommunications companies are forced to play by others? They are in fact the same, though now the tech companies dwarf many of their fellow publishers and telecommunications companies yet still get to play by rules that favor them. This is in defiance of free-market principles: government isn’t supposed to pick winners and losers. It is supposed to create a fair playing field for everyone to compete according to the same rules and regulations so that the consumer benefits. Instead, we see it creating rigged games that allow monopolies to develop.
But this is also about what the internet actually is and who gets to decide what speech or content resides on the internet. Would Google, Facebook, and Amazon exist if there were no internet? Of course not—and I hesitate even to broach the question because it’s an absurd one. They didn’t create the internet; they are in effect, squatters having built on a foundation they did not build and do not own.
In many ways, you could argue no one really owns the internet. It is a public square, a public arena, much like the Agora and Forum of ancient times, only in digital form. So why do squatters on property not their own get to dictate anything on any level on that property? These companies were given a great deal of freedom to grow, to innovate products, and—while the Justice Department’s antitrust division pulled a Rip Van Winkle—become monopolies. To put it mildly, mistakes were made. Those mistakes need to be corrected.
If we do not correct our mistakes, our great rights of speech and assembly, offline and online, are in danger. Someone is going to be the final defender of our natural rights as codified in the Constitution. Do we want un-elected global monopolistic corporations—entities that may or may not consider themselves American companies, ruling you by algorithms? Do we want them limiting the flow of information in the online public arena, manipulating it to benefit themselves and their view of the world? Or do we want duly elected leaders of a constitutional republic defending our rights?
In a constitutional republic, all power flows from the people to their various elected officials, not to corporations or private companies. And when monopolies develop, in order to reset to a free-market dynamic, monopolies must be broken up so that competition can benefit the consumer once more.
Despite the naysayers, Hawley is on the right path. May more Republicans and Democrats join him in this effort because this is about the future of our republic and ensuring that we will have our freedom and natural rights a generation from now.
These are dangerous times—we are far more on a razor’s edge than most people think because of where these tech companies are going, not only with the control of the flow of information but also with their work in general artificial intelligence and automation. We should recognize them for the dangers that they’ve become and fight for our rights. I want a constitutional republic with my natural rights guaranteed, not only for myself and my children but even for dangerously naïve people like French. Even he deserves always to have every right to express his foolish ideas detached from reality.
Far too many politicians on both sides of the aisle are being paid off by Big Tech and they will sell us out in order to enrich themselves, consequences be damned.
David French, and his fellow corporate conservatives at the NRO, are not to be taken seriously.
Fake news - Section 230 says nothing about neutrality.
having built on a foundation they did not build
Sure thing, Barack.
I never listen to Hawley. What did Smoot have to say? [/smile]
It is time to dust off those acts, rinse and repeat. All of us should do our part by using duckduckgo.com instead of Google. I am actually impressed that it doesn't fill your search results up with anywhere near the amount of horse$#*+ to wade through.
We have to friendly with corporate America for to long. The more we lower their taxes the less they need us and the more liberal they become. If the only way to turn them into conservatives is to raise their taxes then so be it.
Corporate America is run by Cultural Marxists who back abortion, open borders, trannies, and Pride Month. It baffles my mind that people still defend it when they have become the primary force promoting the Left’s agenda for a while now.
“Corporate America is run by Cultural Marxists who back abortion, open borders, trannies, and Pride Month. It baffles my mind that people still defend it when they have become the primary force promoting the Left’s agenda for a while now”
I am glad I am not the only one on this board who thinks that. Thank you for your input.
"The Capitalist will sell us the Rope that we will hang them with."
Communists know they can play dirty while those of character and integrity will play by the rules.
Now, I'm not in line to sell my soul to gain the world but men of integrity need to understand they are not fighting an enemy that lives by their rules. The enemy will break and change every rule to win.
There are those who don't want to stoop to the level of the left (and I understand this) but unless we call them out, unless we expose them for what they're doing, unless we challenge them, unless we fight our enemy stands a good chance of beating us.
You can't play nice with bullies and expect to win.
When every Fortune 500 company has rainbow colored corporate logo for Pride Month, you really have to stop and think about what’s going on.
Teddy Roosevelt set about to create an approach that focused on anti-trust. I think it helps for gov’t to have some ability to say when something is too big.
Unfortunately, the too big banks have gotten in control of too much power (the Federal Reserve). I need to read more about the environment that resulted in Congress giving away so much power back in the early 20th century.
So it will not be surprising if some quasi-gov’t entity is proposed in which the big tech companies can hide that they are pulling strings.
They enter office to take the bribe and sell us out. That is how the game is played. That is how thousandaires become millionaires.
SEC & FTC regulations generally, and CDA/230 regulation specifically, definitely apply. RICO statutes probably apply. Anti-Trust regulations probably apply.
We do not need new regulations. We need the political will by those in office to enforce existing authority over these publicly-traded corporations (not private companies).
We do not have that. We have sound and fury signifying nothing - as usual.
They are not like us are they! I used to think every tax hike on the rich and on corporations was a step to socialism. Now I believe that combining with lefty rag tag types to raise their taxes maybe the only way to stop socialism.
Big Tech will have loopholes that will mean they don't have to pay built into any law.
It is like this push for every Internet seller having to remit state and local sales tax based on where the buyer, not seller, is located. The little guys can't do it. The big sellers already are doing it.
I remit to my state any sales tax for my state that I collect on a quarterly basis. If I have to do that on 900 different state and local taxes I will be forced to shut down.
There is more than e commerce there are taxers that can be placed on them like on their profits. There are ways to do this right! We need to take back our country and that is the number one concern.
It's not "defending" corporations to say they have property rights - it's fundamental conservatism.
Nobody on FR advocates that we not do those things - only that we respect their property rights.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.