3 ms·

The public GOP position for a pretty long time has been that increasing competition and trusting the free market will resolve inequalities and unequal access to

The public GOP position for a pretty long time has been that increasing competition and trusting the free market will resolve inequalities and unequal access to platforms. I think it's worthwhile and meaningful to point out that their strategy of tackling big tech does not align with that ideal. It is meaningful to point out that the GOP is directly trying to legislate speech for large companies rather than address market forces that consolidate power in the hands of those companies. Looking at the attitudes behind efforts like Florida's tech law -- I don't think that's dehumanizing, it's just interesting. We're seeing a massive flip in the "conventional" wisdom about GOP's market philosophy: > "Platforms like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube are functionally the public square of the digital age. It is wrong that these platforms control and censor speech with impunity." That's a surprising thing to hear from a supposedly free-market Conservative political party. I think it's interesting that the GOP's official statements focus almost entirely on censorship and on government regulation of hosted speech, instead of on the market itself and on consumer-driven outcomes. If that comes across as dehumanizing... :shrug:, I don't know, my opinion is that it's healthy to critically examine party lines and think about the motivations behind them. And it's not like the title is wrong: the GOP genuinely isn't targeting consumer choice or general consumers right now, they're specifically and very narrowly targeting a subset of consumers, they specifically care about Republican censorship. They're not even targeting broad censorship -- they're not talking about sex workers or LGBTQ+ demonetization. There's a little bit of an implication I hear behind the GOP's official statements, to me it sounds like they're saying that they are fine with big tech as it is, just as long as it stops censoring Conservative voices. Which, yeah, I think that's meaningful to talk about.

brodouevencode 5y ago
The hypocrisy is terribly off-putting, and does nothing for the party. Great and thoughtful response, btw.
- krapp 5y ago
  It's not hypocrisy, rather the free market beliefs of Republicanism (at least as espoused) have been replaced by neo-Trumpist populism and its persecution complex about Marxist puppetmasters controlling the media.
iammisc 5y ago
We're seeing a reversion of GOP philosophy away from the influence of libertarianism (which is not traditionally conservative or even Republican) towards more traditional ways of managing markets. > That's a surprising thing to hear from a supposedly free-market Conservative political party. No it's not really. The GOP is not in favor of a perfectly free market and never has been. Other than libertarian extremists who may find their home in the party, you'll be hard-pressed to find a GOP politician that opposes things like public right of ways on private property.- Also, I'll point out that liberals attempting to parse out GOP 'attitudes' are almost always wrong. I've been pointing out the flip in GOP attitudes away from free market absolutism for many years now. Popular commentators like Michael Knowles and Matt Walsh have as well. Suddenly, a liberal publication discovers it and tries to point out 'hypocrisy' on thinking that's been changing for the better half of the last decade. Keep up.
- danShumway 5y ago
  > The GOP is not in favor of a perfectly free market and never has been I don't agree that this is just Liberals reading things into GOP positions, the GOP does position itself publicly as a free market party. Whether or not their actions line up with that philosophy isn't really the point. I do agree that under Trump people may have gotten a bit more open about the fact that they reject liberalism and/or Libertarian philosophies. I have seen a relatively large increase in Conservatives telling me that they don't trust the free market to solve problems. But in general, the official party messaging hasn't changed just because the actions don't line up with it. Of course, there's a lot of different Conservatives, and different areas/groups have different beliefs. But in my experience, if you step into mainline Conservative spaces and talk to (especially older) Conservatives, they will still tell you they believe in using the free market to solve problems. They will tell you that the government shouldn't decide outcomes. They will tell you that the free market solves discrimination. They will usually tell you that mandating equal access is government overreach. And these people are not Libertarians. They're not arguing for completely unregulated markets; but they are arguing for free market solutions for problems like discrimination or bias. They generally tell me that legislating for equitable outcomes in representation instead of processes is incorrect. The fact that people can find hypocrisies or disagreements or differing opinions about to what degree the GOP favors market solutions to problems -- that doesn't mean that the GOP is not cultivating a very specific view of itself and a set of narratives that it likes to tell about itself. It is, of course, a mistake to assume that genuinely held political ideals and actions from party think-tanks are going always going to match a party's PR, but it is equally a mistake to assume that differing opinions or actions from party members means that the PR is irrelevant or that it shouldn't be discussed. Most ordinary Conservatives I personally know outside of think-tanks or extremely engaged groups would disagree with your assessment of their own party. They believe (right or wrong) that they are free market Conservatives. When I talk about their beliefs, I'm not parsing out, or reading into, or guessing anything about their internal representation of their motivations. This is what they tell me, this is what they think that their party stands for. So I think whether they're right or wrong about what their party believes is worth talking about and reflecting on. If younger or more involved members of the party have dropped those positions, or if the demographics have shifted -- the party doesn't seem to feel a lot of urgency to reach out to older/rural Republicans to let them know about that change -- at least not in my experience in the Conservative communities I encounter.

brodouevencode 5y ago

The hypocrisy is terribly off-putting, and does nothing for the party. Great and thoughtful response, btw.

krapp 5y ago
It's not hypocrisy, rather the free market beliefs of Republicanism (at least as espoused) have been replaced by neo-Trumpist populism and its persecution complex about Marxist puppetmasters controlling the media.

iammisc 5y ago

We're seeing a reversion of GOP philosophy away from the influence of libertarianism (which is not traditionally conservative or even Republican) towards more traditional ways of managing markets. > That's a surprising thing to hear from a supposedly free-market Conservative political party. No it's not really. The GOP is not in favor of a perfectly free market and never has been. Other than libertarian extremists who may find their home in the party, you'll be hard-pressed to find a GOP politician that opposes things like public right of ways on private property.- Also, I'll point out that liberals attempting to parse out GOP 'attitudes' are almost always wrong. I've been pointing out the flip in GOP attitudes away from free market absolutism for many years now. Popular commentators like Michael Knowles and Matt Walsh have as well. Suddenly, a liberal publication discovers it and tries to point out 'hypocrisy' on thinking that's been changing for the better half of the last decade. Keep up.

danShumway 5y ago
> The GOP is not in favor of a perfectly free market and never has been I don't agree that this is just Liberals reading things into GOP positions, the GOP does position itself publicly as a free market party. Whether or not their actions line up with that philosophy isn't really the point. I do agree that under Trump people may have gotten a bit more open about the fact that they reject liberalism and/or Libertarian philosophies. I have seen a relatively large increase in Conservatives telling me that they don't trust the free market to solve problems. But in general, the official party messaging hasn't changed just because the actions don't line up with it. Of course, there's a lot of different Conservatives, and different areas/groups have different beliefs. But in my experience, if you step into mainline Conservative spaces and talk to (especially older) Conservatives, they will still tell you they believe in using the free market to solve problems. They will tell you that the government shouldn't decide outcomes. They will tell you that the free market solves discrimination. They will usually tell you that mandating equal access is government overreach. And these people are not Libertarians. They're not arguing for completely unregulated markets; but they are arguing for free market solutions for problems like discrimination or bias. They generally tell me that legislating for equitable outcomes in representation instead of processes is incorrect. The fact that people can find hypocrisies or disagreements or differing opinions about to what degree the GOP favors market solutions to problems -- that doesn't mean that the GOP is not cultivating a very specific view of itself and a set of narratives that it likes to tell about itself. It is, of course, a mistake to assume that genuinely held political ideals and actions from party think-tanks are going always going to match a party's PR, but it is equally a mistake to assume that differing opinions or actions from party members means that the PR is irrelevant or that it shouldn't be discussed. Most ordinary Conservatives I personally know outside of think-tanks or extremely engaged groups would disagree with your assessment of their own party. They believe (right or wrong) that they are free market Conservatives. When I talk about their beliefs, I'm not parsing out, or reading into, or guessing anything about their internal representation of their motivations. This is what they tell me, this is what they think that their party stands for. So I think whether they're right or wrong about what their party believes is worth talking about and reflecting on. If younger or more involved members of the party have dropped those positions, or if the demographics have shifted -- the party doesn't seem to feel a lot of urgency to reach out to older/rural Republicans to let them know about that change -- at least not in my experience in the Conservative communities I encounter.