Posted on 06/29/2020 4:45:37 PM PDT by janetjanet998
Bill Mitchell @mitchellvii YouTube just banned Stefan Molyneux.
A million followers.
Hundreds of millions of views.
No warning given.
Gone.
WHEN will Congress do something about this?
Racism is anything the left wing tech dictators claim it is. This is something Semimojo either doesn't understand, or something he deliberately refuses to understand.
They cannot be allowed to be the judge. We must force the 1rst amendment on them.
Such drama.
Also regulation is obviously just fine. When federal money, student loans, etc are given to universities they must comply with a raft of title 9 and EEOC law.
Or talk anyone in the defense industry what kind of very intrusive Federal rules come with Defense contracts.
Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Amazon all do massive business with the government. It would be well within the law to make them adopt a neutral policy for politics in return for Federal contracts.
Listen you fool. If we allow this to continue, there will be no such thing as private property. If i'm going to be forced into communism, I say let's grab some of it right now and use it to make them "community property."
And then make them carry all comrade's speech.
Oh, that's right.
We have to rely on the Minister of Compelled Speech to tell us what can be moderated.
Slavery was legal too. "Legal" isn't justification. We need to go John Brown on their @$$.
Do you know that the 1st Amendment applies to the government and not to private companies? The Tech oligarchs are no different than the railroads, the oil companies, the telephone company, and many other monopolies that have become out of control. Government can break up monopolies or impose rules to protect consumers, but that requires politicians and right now all of them don't see a problem. Including Republicans. And as long as the politicians are getting wealthy with every election, nothing will change.
And yet people are burning down buildings in the big cities.
You remind me of the Jews who supported the Nazis before they figured out what was happening. I hope you eventually wake up.
I disagree with that interpretation. It does not apply to private companies that are too small to regulate public communications. It very much applies to companies that are big enough to regulate public communications. The intent of the 1rst amendment is that speech not be censored.
The Tech oligarchs are no different than the railroads, the oil companies, the telephone company, and many other monopolies that have become out of control.
I don't care how it's done. It must be done. These corporations either need to be tamed or destroyed.
Are lemonade stands conspiring with certain advertisers and other partnerships using the Center for Countering Digital Hate to shut down other lemonade stands? What publisher, whoops, I mean platform qualifies as a competitor (Even the American Sugar Refining Company that provided products to those “lemonade stands” had competitors but was deemed to engage in foul practice) to YouTube? BitChute, lol. Keep building those straw men I guess.
No, you constantly dodge the issue. If the property owner can't decide how his property is used who does?
Be clear. In this case who decides what behavior YouTube has to allow?
Sorry, not in the Constitution. Legislation and regulation can be the remedy if these companies are acting as a utility, and if not, they can be sued by people who are harmed by their business activities. But, too many politicians are on the take. Sucks to be us.
OK, if you can't see the analogy try this.
The owner of FR decides to let Laz and humblegunner each use his platform to solicit donations to support their respective vices.
Just as with YouTube both are using someone else's platform for profit.
At some point Jim finds out that Laz is taking his profits and donating them to BLM. Jim kicks his ass off and lets gunner stay.
Is that restraint of trade?
I do not dodge the issue. You keep substituting the wrong issue for the real issue.
I no longer give the slightest crap about big tech "property rights." So far as i'm concerned, they are a threat, and I welcome any and all methods of bringing them to destruction.
If we are going to be forced into communism, we might as well adopt this portion of communism right now. No property rights for massive communications companies. All communications companies are to be owned by the state, and therefore will not be permitted to censor speech.
You want communism? Not stopping big tech censorship is how we get communism.
Disagree. It's just as much in the constitution as gay marriage and abortion, so therefore it is in the constitution.
Since we are going this direction anyways, might as well use the tools of the left.
Enjoy life in your post-Constitutional wasteland.
Just don't come looking for help when someone else with your disdain for the rule of law decides to come after you.
Sorry, contact the DNC, they handle unconstitutional transactions.
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.