6 ms·

Amazon has a right to associate (or not associate) with whomever they want. This is a fundamental principle of freedom - something Parler should know, understan

Amazon has a right to associate (or not associate) with whomever they want. This is a fundamental principle of freedom - something Parler should know, understand, and espouse. Why are they fighting? They should be applauding.

minikites 6y ago
Free market for thee, but not for me.
- crooked-v 6y ago
  > Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progre...
  - mjburgess 6y ago
    It is propagandistic to call that "conservatism". It's commonly called, "tribalism". And yes, healthy politics is conducted on the basis that human societies are tribal. Democracy is just the "accounting system" for competing tribal concerns. Universalism, "classical liberalism", etc. is an occasional side effect of "healthy tribalism". It cannot be a political goal, because there are genuine contradictions in the preferences of various groups -- and they cannot be all jointly-realised. Faux-universalism fails to acknowledge this an ends up preferencing the "natural" distribution of resources, ie., that arising from the most powerful groups (taking, competing) with the weaksest.
  - glangdale 6y ago
    This is certainly true of modern "Trumpian" conservatism. I think it's possible to imagine a cautious centre-right conservative for whom this characterization does not hold (a la Buckley's quote "A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.") I'm not either kind of conservative myself, but I'd much rather deal with the old-school variety, who at their best represent a reasonable chunk of society.
ed25519FUUU 6y ago
This is true with one important exception: you can not refuse business on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin. Refusing business based on political ideology is not only allowed but seems to be encouraged!
- isaiahg 6y ago
  If you read the letter amazon sent they were very clear this wasn't about politics. There were posts advocating killing in the form of execution, beheadings, and burnings. Hard to imagine any company wants to be associated with that kind of thing.
- minikites 6y ago
  Do you really think refusing business based on someone's race is the same as refusing business based on someone's violent rhetoric?
  - ed25519FUUU 6y ago
    No of course not. For starters one is illegal and one is not.
fasdf1122 6y ago
Agreed. But section 230 protection needs to be removed - these social media companies are publishers and should be held responsible for their content.

minikites 6y ago

Free market for thee, but not for me.

crooked-v 6y ago
> Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: there must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect. https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progressives/#comment-729288 https://crookedtimber.org/2018/03/21/liberals-against-progre...
- mjburgess 6y ago
  It is propagandistic to call that "conservatism". It's commonly called, "tribalism". And yes, healthy politics is conducted on the basis that human societies are tribal. Democracy is just the "accounting system" for competing tribal concerns. Universalism, "classical liberalism", etc. is an occasional side effect of "healthy tribalism". It cannot be a political goal, because there are genuine contradictions in the preferences of various groups -- and they cannot be all jointly-realised. Faux-universalism fails to acknowledge this an ends up preferencing the "natural" distribution of resources, ie., that arising from the most powerful groups (taking, competing) with the weaksest.
- glangdale 6y ago
  This is certainly true of modern "Trumpian" conservatism. I think it's possible to imagine a cautious centre-right conservative for whom this characterization does not hold (a la Buckley's quote "A conservative is someone who stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.") I'm not either kind of conservative myself, but I'd much rather deal with the old-school variety, who at their best represent a reasonable chunk of society.

ed25519FUUU 6y ago

This is true with one important exception: you can not refuse business on the basis of race, color, religion or national origin. Refusing business based on political ideology is not only allowed but seems to be encouraged!

isaiahg 6y ago
If you read the letter amazon sent they were very clear this wasn't about politics. There were posts advocating killing in the form of execution, beheadings, and burnings. Hard to imagine any company wants to be associated with that kind of thing.
minikites 6y ago
Do you really think refusing business based on someone's race is the same as refusing business based on someone's violent rhetoric?
- ed25519FUUU 6y ago
  No of course not. For starters one is illegal and one is not.

fasdf1122 6y ago

Agreed. But section 230 protection needs to be removed - these social media companies are publishers and should be held responsible for their content.