I just want to say that I really like the format of that article: short and to the point.
Stripe bans Trump campaign
141–150 of 1001 posts
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#142Freedom of speech, you cry. Well, OK, this is freedom of speech…for Stripe. They don’t like what Trump has done. They are a private company. It’s their ball. They can take it home whenever they want to. Speech has consequences, and if you foment a hostile takeover of Congress, you pay your price.
This argument went out the window when Amazon started infrastructure bans. "Build your own..." What? Internet? Country?
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#143"Give me liberty or give me death"
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
The QAnon folks are no less irrational than any other (pseudo-)religious devotees and should be afforded the same protections under the first amendment.
This is like the millionth time this has been posted on this website in the past few days, but the first amendment applies to the government, not private companies.
The first amendment applies to corporations when they use the state to enforce their speech over someone else's. The actual case history surrounding first amendment rights is way more complicated than you're implying. There are situations where the government can restrict your first amendment rights; there are situations where you can have your first amendment rights violated by a company — and seek restitution.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#145Isn't this overreach? Financial organisation making conditions on which political party you can support.
[deleted]
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#146[deleted]
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#147Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Hollywood is a private business as well. They were within their rights to make a blacklist. And people cheered on big business for protecting them and snitched on their friends to their employers, just like they're doing now I'm not seeing the parallel to Stripe choosing who they want (or don't want) to do business with. Especially since there is no "blacklist" circulated and used by everyone in that industry. Strip…
when did I say Stripe didn't have the legal right to do this? I used the Hollywood blacklist as a parallel precisely because it too was a legal enforcement of political speech by a big consolidated industry that had the power to end peoples' careers I only think it's morally wrong.
But it's not a parallel at all.
All the Hollywood studios (a bunch of different entities) conspired with each other not to hire those people.
Stripe is a single entity and isn't (AFAIK) working with others on the payment processing industry to block a specific set of people/groups.
And it's protected (and IMHO, should be) because it's a political organization -- Stripe has the right (as do you or I) to choose whether or not they wish to support (verbally, financially or through other material methods) any particular political party, policy position or candidate.
Let's say that you own a business that makes t-shirts. And you strongly support candidate X. Should you be required to make t-shirts for candidate Y (candidate X's opponent)?
And if you chose not to make t-shirts for candidate Y, is that morally wrong?
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
There's a big difference in wrong opinion and inciting violence. This isn't the government doing this. This is private companies taking action against the spread hate and lies. These are companies I want to do business with.
Where do you draw a line? These days in a snowflake culture any opinion can cause outrage and violence. It's just a matter of interpretation and who reads the message. Should companies be allowed to restrict your freedom to information? It's quite patronising.
They have clear rules against inciting violence that were clearly violated. That's a good line to draw and enforce.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#149There is a difference between bank accounts, Visa/MasterCard access and Internet service, on one hand, and App Stores, Twitter accounts and payment providers, on the other hand. The First Amendment promises both free speech and free assembly. Core to the latter is the freedom not to assemble. This freedom is regulated. You can’t refuse to do business with protected classes. But political affiliation is not a protecte…
> Stripe and Twitter are pretty clearly the latter. They might be the latter, but I wouldn't consider it obvious. Regarding social media, we've gotten to the point where even US Visa applications ask for social media handles (and I understand they consider it as a negative datum if you don't provide one). And we're also at the point where some companies won't provide you with respectable service unless you @ them on…
> And we're also at the point where some companies won't provide you with respectable service unless you @ them on social media.
Real-world example: T-Mobile. Their Twitter and Facebook representatives (called T-Force) have better customer service (they are more empowered to help you without supervisor escalation and fix things faster) than calling 611.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#150All of these silicon valley companies need to realize they live in a bubble. You can't continue doing this and expect it to be recieved well. Yes the extreme right is ridiculous. But the extreme left is too. Spend some time outside silicon valley and other liberal hubs. Understand the perspective of others. I am not in favor of violence. I am not in favor of Trump's behavior. However Trumps stance on policy typically…
I’m sure they took it into account that certain people would feel “alienated” by this, but weighed it against what has happened over the last 4 years and what happened last week in the Capitol and decided “yep, worth it”.
Personally, I don’t understand how you can acknowledge that you ‘far from love Trump’ (paraphrase) but then consider a banning of his campaign (which is separate from the R party and from conservatism) as against you, a conservative.