agree it has to go both ways, otherwise you are playing a game of slippery slope where you start blocking “those you don’t agree with”... what happens when le

agree it has to go both ways, otherwise you are playing a game of slippery slope where you start blocking “those you don’t agree with”... what happens when leftist parties start to become more resurgent in eurozone (for example podemos)... do we block them too because they are calling for a changes that may threaten the economic systems that support these companies? what happens when you are labeled “far right” or “far left” and the “committee” thinks so too... is that enough reason to literally cut-off your access to money? just because a committee said so? these things are not the purview of for-profit corporations... this is for democracies to decide (e.g free speech, free association, etc) [edit] just to clarify my point isn’t to support these groups, but that corporations shouldn’t be doing the blocking, if any, instead democratically elected governments should be doing so after going through a judicial process (iow democratic peer-review)... at least then he public saw the decision process, that it was transparent, and it was “fair” and can have a process for appeal etc; corporate committees have none of this.