One of the nuggets to be mined from the wholesale cancelling of politically unapproved speech by the Tech Oligarchs – soon to be empowered by government oligarchs, if the “kraken” doesn’t somehow prevent it – is how obvious their pathological dishonesty has become.
Amazon, Facebook and Twitter have asserted that, as private businesses, they have the right to decide with whom to do business – and not do business with. But do they feel the same way about the right of other private businesses to practice what they preach?
Only when it conforms with what they preach.
Consider the religious tenets of the Sickness Cult; specifically, the dogma that requires all to wear a Face Burqa within a privately owned business, even if the owner isn’t religious and isn’t interested in proselytizing to his customers, much less insisting they show respect for a religion he doesn’t subscribe to.
It is a private business, is it not?
Why then must this private business be forced to conduct its business according to the religious tenets of people who don’t own the business? Isn’t that a violation of the owner’s rights, just the same as the rights asserted by Amazon, Facebook and Twitter?
They claim no one is forced to use their services; that people are free to use other services more to their liking. Bully! But why doesn’t the same standard apply to other private businesses, the ones the people who run Amazon, Twitter and Facebook insist be closed to people who aren’t forced to go within?
People should be free to do business with whomever they wish, according to whatever terms are mutually agreeable to the parties. If one party does not find the terms agreeable then they are free to not do business with the other party. This is the argument purveyed with great unction by Amazon, Facebook and Twitter justifying their decisions to stop doing business with Parler, for instance (in the case of Amazon) and cancelling the ability of people whose opinions – and facts – they dislike from their platforms, including the president of the United States (in the case of Twitter and Facebook).
They do have every right. It’s despicable – in the manner of “No Colored” signs on the door of businesses back in the ’50s – but they have every right as privately owned businesses to do business with whomever they wish, according to whatever terms they wish – so long as people are free to take their business elsewhere.
Aye, there’s the rub.
These Despicables want to enjoy the right to cancel, close – and decree – to others while at the same time denying the right of any other privately owned business to set its own terms and conditions.
The Despicables cannot stand the idea of freedom of religion when it comes to the wearing of the Face Burqa, for instance. The Holy Vestment must be worn everywhere, even within privately owned businesses and irrespective of a businesses’ private property rights.
Privately owned businesses are also unfree to unlock their doors and leave it up to customers to decide whether they wish to enter. It is not enough that no one is forced to enter these privately owned businesses. These privately owned businesses must be forced to not let them in – and if they are let in, force them to perform bizarre religious rituals including the wearing of a “mask.”
But this is nothing new. The Left specializes in situational ethics; in fungible etymology. Like Humpty Dumpty, a word means exactly what the Left says it does until the Left says it means something else.
This creates difficulties in the minds of rational, honest people – who take words at face value and base their arguments on moral principles that aren’t fungible. Thus the stymying of many conservatives – and even libertarians – with regard to the Mandatory Burqua policies imposed by many businesses under pressure from the government to do so – and also with regard to calling out the Despicables who brazenly refuse to do business with those whose opinions – and facts – they do not like, claiming they have private property rights to do so. . . and then going on a rampage when a privately owned business uses the same argument to defend its private property rights.
The Left is defined not so much by its leftism but its psychotic doublethink. It is rancidly intolerant while touting itself as ethereally tolerant. It promotes racism in the name of combatting it.
And it thinks property rights only apply to correct privately owned businesses; i.e., to their businesses.
This has always been the case but now it’s out in the open – which may finally put an end to this business.
* * *
Got a question about cars, Libertarian politics – or anything else? Click on the “ask Eric” link and send ’em in! If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! Our donate button is here.