Live data from Hacker News

Stripe bans Trump campaign

axios.com

381–390 of 1001 posts

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a counterexample: The Pirate Bay have successfully dealt with this sort of thing for many years, and they were subject to much harsher and more sustained censorship. Including legal attacks by various nation states. Is it really totalitarianism in this case? Or, just some private companies inconveniencing people by choosing not to do business with them?

It is divise and it will backfire. Soon there will have to be a separate everything for Republicans and Democrats. Chances are that Trump is going to own a big part of it. That is why Trump is not on Gab or Parler, because he will compete with them.

I think the issue is more that Trump, who is a highly divisive character, has become the face of the Republican party.

So people end up conflating the ostracism of Trump and those in his periphery with an attack on the Republican party.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#382

Maybe I'm being naive but it seems like a larger problem is being ignored here that I feel I should call attention to. This is going to piss people off and some of those people are going to be real, nothing-to-lose extremists. Actions like these though seemingly harmless in the short-term are going to radicalize the exact person/type of people that you do not want to radicalize. Because a lot of high-ranking SV folks…

On the other hand, avoiding conflict in the short-term will only embolden those who create and thrive on conflict. For these types of people, their next move is usually to escalate. You see this with bullies, abusive relationships, rapists, serial killers, terrorists, etc. They learn what they can get away with, they like the power it gives them, and they try something more.

Therefore, we can't make decisions based on the fear of their response, even if we have a personal aversion to conflict. That's falling into the trap of the abused. We have to make decisions based on defending our principles and standing up for what we believe is right.

No matter what, some people are going to be pissed off at any sufficiently meaningful decision (or indecision). If the people pissed off are violent types, well, then perhaps that's a sign the right decision was made.

I understand that there's a hell of a lot of nuance to this - sometimes you don't poke the sleeping bear. I think Wednesday showed the bear is absolutely not asleep.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#383
post #64

Not to be reductionist but I don’t see this as a totalitarian issue. This is a free market decision. $Company decides to sever ties with another organization. That choice can be good, bad, reactive, overreactive, misguided, etc but it’s still a market participant choice. Market remains open for other market participants to make other choices.

[deleted]

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#384
post #26

The people cheering this on will not be protected when the mob comes for you. We live in a digital age. If having the wrong opinion means you can get your bank accounts and all Internet presence removed from you, it's not any different than living under a fascist government.

I don’t know if you were paying attention last week, but the mob literally came for the members of Congress. There are wrong opinions, and then there is “six million Jews were not enough” and “hang the Vice President”, and a violent mob attacking the Capitol. No one is under any obligation to tolerate such actions in a civil society. If I advocate for your murder, am I just expressing an opinion that should be conseq…

"I don’t know if you were paying attention last week, but the mob literally came for the members of Congress."

A couple of hundred people attacked the capitol in a crowd of 500,000+. Do you remember the phrase 'mostly peaceful protesters'? We've been hearing it for 8+ months after violent riots in major cities which resulted in 30+deaths, hundreds of innocent people attacked, and 1 billion+ in property damage.

"There are wrong opinions, and then there is “six million Jews were not enough” and “hang the Vice President”, and a violent mob attacking the Capitol. No one is under any obligation to tolerate such actions in a civil society."

Antifa and BLM have taken over multiple state and federal buildings over the past 8 months. In June, for instance, multiple fires were set all over DC. A church was nearly burnt to the ground and the President had to go to an underground bunker as a result of the threats outside the white house.

Unlike the protests in January 6th (which was an unorganized mess of random people), BLM and Antifa are professional rioters/criminals. They wear masks to protect themselves and have corporate backing from large left-leaning organizations.

Instead of concern, local leaders painted BLM and named a major street after them.

I'm not sure why you only seem to care when it's Trump supporters. Political violence is wrong on both sides, but only one political not only supported it, but paid the bail of rioters and continue to deny that it even exists. The real criminals are about to get into office.

"If I advocate for your murder, am I just expressing an opinion that should be consequence free if someone kills you? Does that change if enough people agree with me that you should be killed?"

You do realize Trump never said any of this, right? Him and his entire campaign have denounced the violence repeatedly. If you listened to the speech before the capitol was attacked, it was not full of any sort of energy. He basically said that it was all in Pence's hands. Supporters were actually angry because he sounded so defeated. This doesn't sound like the actions of someone trying to storm the Capitol.

The media+tech companies+incoming administration are censoring and destroying their political opponents for things they themselves have been supporting and instigating for 4 years.

If it wasn't so scary, I would call it pathetic actions from limp-dick journalists.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes some were violent. Yes those who were violent should be arrested, investigated, etc. But I'd argue half the country doesn't agree that the mobs intent was on killing members of congress. And that's the issue. You view it from that perspective, and from that perspective it makes sense to ban everything. But half the country (likely) doesn't agree with that perspective. I remember seeing bloody heads of Trump on tw…

Huh? You're really trying to compare what some randos do on Twitter to what the President of the United States did on Wednesday? Really think about it: the President of the United States incited a mob to attack the Capitol to prevent the certification of the vote of his political opponent. He did this by pushing constant lies and propaganda for months, and urging his followers to "fight" for him. Go watch his speech…

Do you honestly believe Trump was trying to overthrow the government? Had that been his real intent I'm fairly certain it would have had a more significant outcome beyond people stealing random envelops and podiums.

It was a protest that went too far. We've seen plenty of this occur from both sides in the past year.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#386
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quite. This is not a political debate. This is about enforcing TOS which explicitly ban use for criminal acts. The fact that the criminal is the President of the United States and his enablers is incidental to the principle. No one wants to ban any reasonable political views. But when a political party organises public mass violence, subversion, insurrection, murder, intimidation of public officers, the attempted ove…

> Attempts to turn this into a debate about political censorship are not being made in good faith But it is political. This summer saw widespread political violence, including attacks on government institutions, not to mention billions in property damage, but the mainstream reaction to that was "Show me where it says protests are supposed to be polite and peaceful"[1] with massive support for the riots from Silicon V…

None of these companies severing ties with Parler or other far-right presences are making political decisions. These are all business decisions, because they are businesses. I've explained this elsewhere, but what if a boycott were to start because the company refused to cut ties with Parler? They should just eat the loss? No, in any market, people vote with their dollars, and the vast majority of tech customers just happen to also be politically liberal. This is what we signed up for when we decided to operate in a free market system.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#387

I'm curious if other countries around the world are going to see how dependent they are on these so called "platforms" and is it going to trigger a change. If Amazon, Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Google, Stripe, etc. decide to ban you, you are done, vanished into thin air. You lose your infrastructure, social network, media channel, de-listed from Search, and oh yeah right, your financial end up being blocked. While Uga…

It's just the new mode of imperialism. Control the economy, control the country.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#388
post #372

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Setting aside for a moment the multiple orders of magnitude difference in lethality per participant, the key distinction for me is this: what happened in the Capitol is about usurping the monopoly on violence possessed by the government. BLM is not about overthrowing the government, and has never posed a credible threat to it. Even if BLM overthrew the government, no one has been talking about mass executions. By con…

> Setting aside for a moment the multiple orders of magnitude difference in lethality per participant Is this really true? I’m tempted to charge the entirety of the post-summer urban bloodbath to the BLM movement. This represents an increase of 3-4000 deaths over the prior year. > BLM is not about overthrowing the government, and has never posed a credible threat to it. Even if BLM overthrew the government, no one ha…

Millions (the estimate I saw was 15-26 million) of people were involved in the BLM protests, which lasted many months. 25 people are known to have been killed. I don’t think it’s reasonable to assign 3-4k deaths to it. By contrast, this was a single event with a few thousand people in which 5 people died. That’s what I mean by orders of magnitude.

I agree that there is a destroy-the-government black bloc present in some of the BLM protests. It’s a fair thing to point out, but I’ll say this: they’ve never had a chance or a credible threat. It’s really a false equivalence to compare a terrorist attack on the Capitol incited by the ruling party in an attempt to overturn a democratic election with seven months of mass protests against police violence.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#389

Maybe I'm being naive but it seems like a larger problem is being ignored here that I feel I should call attention to. This is going to piss people off and some of those people are going to be real, nothing-to-lose extremists. Actions like these though seemingly harmless in the short-term are going to radicalize the exact person/type of people that you do not want to radicalize. Because a lot of high-ranking SV folks…

I don't agree with this at all and I am tired of seeing "sensible" people here explain how it's important to reach out to fascists and make them feel loved. You're only advocating further normalisation of fascism, and depriving them of the consequences of their actions—consequences that have always been a part of civil society. What's more, that you seem to be more preoccupied with not upsetting these fascists rather than that just a few days ago these very same fascists either attempted a coup or supported a coup does indeed speak of your self-professed naivety (at best). These fascists are a cancer on the body politic and the solution is not to listen to many of the posters here who think that somehow magically the best course of action is simply to do nothing at all, lest we upset the poor lickle fascists.

Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign

#390

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It wouldn't make any difference in this case, as it clearly has nothing to do with political affiliation anyway.

Quite. This is not a political debate. This is about enforcing TOS which explicitly ban use for criminal acts. The fact that the criminal is the President of the United States and his enablers is incidental to the principle. No one wants to ban any reasonable political views. But when a political party organises public mass violence, subversion, insurrection, murder, intimidation of public officers, the attempted ove…

> No one wants to ban any reasonable political views.

No one (including the US Supreme Court) has a definition for "reasonable."

That's what has some of us alarmed.

For Trump and his cronies? Sure, there are more than enough actual laws they've broken. But let's justify action against them on actual laws, as opposed to because-SV-doesn't-like-them and has public support at the moment. Or even use the moment to pass new laws, covering the type of behavior we want to make illegal.

Instead, this feels a lot like 9/12, in that people are post-hoc justifying popular actions on a moral basis, to the detriment of legal foundations.

And as we found then, as soon as you decide "terrorists can't be reasoned with and don't deserve rights," then being able to label someone a terrorist becomes a powerful tool...

Post reply on HN