This is why we need cryptocurrency.
Stripe bans Trump campaign
811–820 of 1001 posts
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#812Earlier quoted context omitted.
Serious question: Would those people have been at the Capitol without Trump's 'Stop the Steal' rhetoric?
Maybe, I don't know. There was a group of people arrested in Michigan (?) for the kidnapping of the Governor (?), so it's possible. But either way, I don't think it's relevant. If you want to boot someone off social media because they espouse a cause that others take too far, then there's a lot of BLM people who should receive the same fate. Anything else is rank hypocrisy. It's worth adding that I think Trump is a p…
At least when it comes to BLM vs Capitol there are three very important differences that far outweigh the surface level similarities:
1. Power - what happened at the Capitol was conducted by people who have enjoyed broad political power, whereas the BLM protests were about the people who have been unjustly under the thumb (or knee) of those in power.
2. Message - the BLM protests were about very real and well documented and long-standing mistreatment of Black Americans at the hands of police, where the ‘stop the steal’ crowd is angry about a complete fabrication.
3. Stakes - is the event threatening to the foundation of society? I think this one is pretty straightforward.
While on the surface the BLM and Capitol events look similar (large groups of people protesting, small groups within committing violence, some government buildings involved), their basis and moral authority are entirely different.
As far as the decision to deplatform, the nature of these types of things is there will never and can never be a simple rule to dictate important judgment calls. Law is not code, nor are the actions or ToS’s of companies. Trump is such a singular figure that is completely unlike others, commanding a huge amount of power through 85M followers and the bully pulpit of the presidency. He is nothing like any BLM or frankly any other Twitter user that it’s almost seems like a joke to draw comparison. That can’t be ignored, in fact that’s the very point - he’s unique, and uniquely dangerous. There is no double standard because there is no comparison. He’s literally the most powerful person in America and Black people are as a group are the least powerful. That matters.
As far as the consequences, well it’s damned if you do damned if you don’t as far as I can see. We have a lot of real problems and divisions in society, and now a lot of people have been whipped up into holding imagined grievances that some are likely to translate into violence down the line. Meanwhile the next few weeks are an incredibly vulnerable time in American democracy due to the power vacuum that occurs during a transfer of power, and based on what information we have available to us, it looks like violence and disruption was being planned prior to any deplatforming. That’s very scary, and we need to do what we can to reasonably minimize that risk.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#813I was on the fence about this, but reading the comments convinced me it was the absolute right decision. The fact that all these institutions just allowed this horrible hateful speech for four years, in the name of free speech etc, despite all the harassment, harm (mental and otherwise) it caused to so many people in America actually emboldened so many to the extent that now that they crossed this invisible line, the…
Can you provide an actual example of hateful speech by Trump or a member of his cabinet?
> this horrible hateful speech for four years
I've heard the left call Trump a racist for 4 years, yet he has never said a racist word. If I'm wrong, provide an example.
So where's the beef?
You've fallen for the big lie.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#814Earlier quoted context omitted.
In their defense, I agree with you that this is a first time when global internet connectivity + social media + hatespeech cocktail has become poisonous to our societal health. We need to deeply think about all this - allowing peaceful, objective, conservative opinions and policy (such as the Lincoln Project) while condemning hate speech, violence, white supremacy and other racist behavior. "He who fights with monste…
> We need to deeply think about all this - allowing peaceful, objective, conservative opinions and policy (such as the Lincoln Project) while condemning hate speech, violence, white supremacy and other racist behavior. But that’s the problem. Nobody trusts people in Silicon Valley or New York City to decide what those things are. These are people who have internalized ideas like “you can’t be racist against white peo…
You're completely oblivious of your own radicalization, it's hilarious.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#815Earlier quoted context omitted.
There shouldn't be any problem with these discussions when they're posed without hate. Immigration for example should be discussed in terms of cost/benefit and immigration of talent, policies, etc., not "Build a wall and Mexico will pay for it" or outright banning people based on religion (remember Muslim ban?). The problem is that these are not conservative principles. This is just hate spewing, plain and straight.
> There shouldn't be any problem with these discussions when they're posed without hate. Immigration for example should be discussed in terms of cost/benefit and immigration of talent, policies, etc., The idea that immigration is solely about “cost/benefit” and “talent, policies, etc.” is an inherently liberal, and indeed quite radically liberal framing of the issue. The International Convention on Civil and Politica…
America has embodied immigration since the Naturalization Act of 1790, albeit for white persons only. Perhaps you're mistaking a country such as Japan? America is far more liberal than what you indicate. Immigration in the US has always been a major centrist point of view since the dawn of this nation.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalization_Act_of_1790
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#816Earlier quoted context omitted.
There shouldn't be any problem with these discussions when they're posed without hate. Immigration for example should be discussed in terms of cost/benefit and immigration of talent, policies, etc., not "Build a wall and Mexico will pay for it" or outright banning people based on religion (remember Muslim ban?). The problem is that these are not conservative principles. This is just hate spewing, plain and straight.
> This is just hate spewing, plain and straight. Hate is an emotion, it is subjective. You might feel hate when you see or hear something, but it is not an intrinsic, objective quality of other people's words. Without using these emotional trigger words, do you think the citizens of a country should be able to decide who visits them in their country?
The point wasn't per se about immigration. The point was to have a respectful, intellectual discourse in public. Pick your favorite public policy topic. My point stands, even if we're discussing soy bean pricing laws. Discussing the details of immigration is a massive topic for another day.
To really drive this home:
1) Don't spread hate - there are obvious limits to this. Calling for assassination of public officials counts as hate speech. Saying something offensive is fine as far as it doesn't incite violence.
2) Have an intelligent, evidence based discussion, be respectful and we're trying to move the country forward. Not divide and turn to our own echo chambers. Come to a resolution through debate and concession.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#817There 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…
> But political affiliation is not a protected class.
This is a distraction. Political speech enjoys the highest level of protection in the US, political speech is one of the primary motivators behind the existence of constitutionally protected speech in the US.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#818Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your point about the 'invisible line' is astute. We're in a crisis of perception and reality right now, and this has caused many to lose sight of the very real lines that we have agreed upon to preserve society and democracy. I think the other important factor here is we are in a very vulnerable moment right now because we are in the midst of a transition of power. It takes time to transfer the apparatus and operatio…
Thing is you can dress it up with ideas of vulnerable moments and apparatus and operations and a uniquely challenging time and all this. But this isn't about Trump, this isn't about now, this is about precedents. If something new and extreme is being done, almost always some extenuating factor will be found to try to justify it. Trump is an unfortunate edge case and has set bad precedents that can hopefully be wisely…
Precedents set by private companies mean absolutely nothing. Precedents set by a court of law have legal bearing, but they may also be challenged or changed (as long as they’re not judged to be unconstitutional, at least in the US). Worrying about precedent setting by private corporations is like premature optimization: there are bigger problems to focus on.
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#819Earlier quoted context omitted.
It has happened before and recently too, so it wouldn't be exactly be shocking. Sneaked in with other stuff, they told the banks to fuck with sellers of Tobacco, Porn and Drug paraphernalia. > Operation Choke Point was a 2013 initiative of the United States Department of Justice[1] which investigated banks in the United States and the business they did with firearm dealers, payday lenders, and other companies believe…
I said: >If the government were to attempt do as you suggest, the courts would slap them down hard. The issues around Operation Choke Point[0] that you linked to were investigated by Congress and the Department of Justice and, as I said, smacked down hard . The above isn't analogous to the current situation, but the result was exactly as I said it would be. Thanks for making my point for me. [0] https://en.wikipedia.…
Some elements of Operation Choke point were shut down hard, others never even got enough due process to see their day in court. We recently made the prime actors of one of these initiatives the vice president.
( https://reason.com/2019/08/26/secret-memos-show-the-governme... )
Re: Stripe bans Trump campaign
#820Earlier quoted context omitted.
You don't have an inherent right to a megaphone. Freedom of speech means you don't get in trouble from the government for saying things, not that you have the right to broadcast your message.
If you can't broadcast, what good is your message?
If you can't broadcast, how good is your message?
If you can't convince enough people that your message is worth propagating, maybe it isn't. If you can, you will have the means.