But that isn't communism, and I'd go as far as to argue that a private business, by definition, can't engage in 'communism'. Outside of protected classes, businesses are always going to limit who can use their services and what messages they're willing to provide a platform for. Either it's always ok to give them that freedom, or it's never ok.
We can't extoll the virtues of the capitalist paradise of the US and then get all pissy when a business says 'I think you're bad for my business so I'm not going to host you anymore'.
I'm not a lawyer - full disclosure - and my current opinion is only informed enough to say that I think there's a definite conversation to be had about updating antitrust, monopolization and other provisions - section 230 for example - to contend with our modern reality.
That said, those laws don't exist right now, and we can't complain that no one is doing anything about something that isn't illegal. I am probably in the minority in stating that I don't think the end all be all is unfettered capitalism, and that there is a place for sensible government rules and restrictions to prevent monopolies from forming.
I think you are misunderstanding my post. I have no issue with the actual decision to making this man the CEO of Amazon...it's Jeff Bezos's company, so he can do what he wants with it as long as it's lawful and legal.
What I DO have an issue with, is rewarding people who make drastic actions that erode the foundations of freedom and America itself. I also think the rules and boundaries have changed since the introduction of the internet and social media. Now that it is basically where we live our lives, public squares like Twitter and Facebook should not have the ability to choose who can talk and who cannot.
We also aren't dealing with a single company here. We are dealing with a united front of the most powerful tech companies on the planet, unelected bureaucrats/technocrats, and prominent politicians in incredible positions of power all over the world....all of whom have declared themselves to be the arbiters of truth and justice.
This Big Tech situation is unprecedented and should not be compared to previous monopolies and/or communist strategies. We cannot assume that they are just innocent mega-corporations trying to make money and sound business decisions. Their goals are much bigger than that.
But that isn't communism, and I'd go as far as to argue that a private business, by definition, can't engage in 'communism'. Outside of protected classes, businesses are always going to limit who can use their services and what messages they're willing to provide a platform for. Either it's always ok to give them that freedom, or it's never ok.
We can't extoll the virtues of the capitalist paradise of the US and then get all pissy when a business says 'I think you're bad for my business so I'm not going to host you anymore'.
Just curious, what's your opinion on anti-trust laws and (specifically tech) monopolization?
I'm not a lawyer - full disclosure - and my current opinion is only informed enough to say that I think there's a definite conversation to be had about updating antitrust, monopolization and other provisions - section 230 for example - to contend with our modern reality.
That said, those laws don't exist right now, and we can't complain that no one is doing anything about something that isn't illegal. I am probably in the minority in stating that I don't think the end all be all is unfettered capitalism, and that there is a place for sensible government rules and restrictions to prevent monopolies from forming.
I think you are misunderstanding my post. I have no issue with the actual decision to making this man the CEO of Amazon...it's Jeff Bezos's company, so he can do what he wants with it as long as it's lawful and legal.
What I DO have an issue with, is rewarding people who make drastic actions that erode the foundations of freedom and America itself. I also think the rules and boundaries have changed since the introduction of the internet and social media. Now that it is basically where we live our lives, public squares like Twitter and Facebook should not have the ability to choose who can talk and who cannot.
We also aren't dealing with a single company here. We are dealing with a united front of the most powerful tech companies on the planet, unelected bureaucrats/technocrats, and prominent politicians in incredible positions of power all over the world....all of whom have declared themselves to be the arbiters of truth and justice.
This Big Tech situation is unprecedented and should not be compared to previous monopolies and/or communist strategies. We cannot assume that they are just innocent mega-corporations trying to make money and sound business decisions. Their goals are much bigger than that.