3 ms·
I am on the side of the post 1960s consensus in the US. Corporations which serve the public must continue to serve the public, without arbitrary tyrannies on th
by scottlocklin 8y ago
I am on the side of the post 1960s consensus in the US. Corporations which serve the public must continue to serve the public, without arbitrary tyrannies on things like political beliefs or sexual practices, or face civil rights lawsuits. If you can make a christian baker bake you a gay cake, you can make Patreon work with ... pretty much anyone. That's what we've been doing post civil rights and post legalization of pornography. Seemed fine with most people!
If you want a might makes right world, which, whether you're capable of understanding it or not, is what you're advocating for, you should at least figure out which side has the guns and tanks. Pretty sure it ain't Patreon censors!
- specialist 8y agoHold on a sec, that's my argument. I'm not being clear enough. Those who insist corporations are people, but then get grumpy when corporations act like people, are hypocrites. Or worse. All I'm saying is that so long as corporations are people, I will continue to vote with my dollars. (Call it a reverse boycott.) We might be on the same side here. If so, my bad.
- scottlocklin 8y agoI'm on the "no censorship by corporations" side. As I said, if some schmuck (an individual business owner) has to bake a cake with a message he profoundly disagrees with, because not doing so violates someone else's civil rights, Patreon (an actual corporation) can suck it up and allow people to make contributions to people who use harsh language on youtube. It's really quite simple.