3 ms·

I take offense to this, and the assumption that I hold this view because "because nobody’s coming for your rights in particular." How do you know that? To what

I take offense to this, and the assumption that I hold this view because "because nobody’s coming for your rights in particular." How do you know that? To what "rights" do you refer? I, like you, am a resident of Texas. I think for Apple to do what the article is suggesting is taking away my right as a Texan to have my representatives craft laws. Politicians need the consent of the governed, and now apparently, the consent of Bay Area corporations who are decidedly progressive.

dctoedt 5y ago
> taking away my right as a Texan to have my representatives craft laws In other words, your right to have your representatives restrict the liberty of the rest of us Texans for no good reason. Sadly, the motto of the Texas Legislature seems to be "Local control!" when it comes to national policy — at least if the federal government is controlled by Democrats — but just the opposite when it comes to blue cities' enactment of progressive local ordinances that offend rural conservatives and/or their corporate donors. (Houstonian here, formerly a lifelong, pretty-conservative Republican.)
- somuchsothat 5y ago
  That's exactly right. That's what 'democracy' means...you vote, and sometimes you lose, but you still have to abide by the will of the voting mass that wins. There's something very entitled to the idea that "I support democracy as long as it advances my agenda. Otherwise (if I'm economically privileged), I'll move to California >>> Canada >>> Overseas somewhere more aligned with me."
  - dctoedt 5y ago
    You created your account literally ten minutes ago, champ. Please re-read what I said: I was calling out the hypocrisy of the Texas GOP: Local control for me but not for thee. And "democracy" does not mean "democratic authoritarianism." (Or as the sour joke went about hard-line Islamist parties during the Arab Spring: One man, one vote, one time.)
  - belltaco 5y ago
    >That's exactly right. That's what 'democracy' means...you vote, and sometimes you lose, but you still have to abide by the will of the voting mass that wins. Let the large cities in Texas decide if abortion should be allowed within city limits. That's totally possible if the state govt delegates powers to counties/cities. Oh wait, that's small govt but goes against the agenda so it will never happen. >There's something very entitled to the idea that "I support democracy as long as it advances my agenda. Otherwise (if I'm economically privileged), I'll move to California >>> Canada >>> Overseas somewhere more aligned with me." Not allowing this sounds like an abusive relationship, like a dictatorship like North Korea where people seeking to leave are killed. Just like the Taliban stopping people in Afghanistan from leaving. The new law also comes from an extremist view of a world religion so the argument has a parallel in that they take a dim view of people trying to leave the extremist religion adherence imposed on others.
- BitwiseFool 5y ago
  >"your right to have your representatives" Yes. That is at the heart of my belief in representative government. And it wasn't my representative alone who voted for this, it was enough of them to get it passed. I've already stated many times that I think this is an atrocious bill and I hope it gets overturned. But at the very least, it was passed by duly elected representatives and it appears to have withstood the courts (for now).
  - dctoedt 5y ago
    OK, I take your point. But actions have consequences; if Apple or whoever wants to take their business elsewhere as a result, then that's their right — right?
locopati 5y ago
The state legislature can craft all the laws they want and businesses can decide they don't want to associate with those states in order to protect their employees. Actions have consequences.
Hermitian909 5y ago
Politics is fundamentally about how groups make decisions. Anything that influences group decision making has a political aspect to it. The status quo implicitly carries a set of norms that will impact group decision making and are thus political, this is hopefully apparent just looking at the differences between countries and their political norms. Indeed, it's hard to find anything that does not somehow touch on group decision making because so little is truly private e.g. want to have a loud party in your apartment? Whether societal norms approve or not will determine you can do that or whether you're forbidden to do that or allowed to potentially bother your neighbors; part of the group. Once properly framed, the idea is practically tautological. But even without that framing it's usually much more obvious for people for whom the status quo is a rough deal.
detaro 5y ago
In what way are your representatives limited in crafting laws by Apple? Should people and companies be forbidden to leave a state just because doing so could have consequences your representatives don't like?

dctoedt 5y ago

> taking away my right as a Texan to have my representatives craft laws In other words, your right to have your representatives restrict the liberty of the rest of us Texans for no good reason. Sadly, the motto of the Texas Legislature seems to be "Local control!" when it comes to national policy — at least if the federal government is controlled by Democrats — but just the opposite when it comes to blue cities' enactment of progressive local ordinances that offend rural conservatives and/or their corporate donors. (Houstonian here, formerly a lifelong, pretty-conservative Republican.)

somuchsothat 5y ago
That's exactly right. That's what 'democracy' means...you vote, and sometimes you lose, but you still have to abide by the will of the voting mass that wins. There's something very entitled to the idea that "I support democracy as long as it advances my agenda. Otherwise (if I'm economically privileged), I'll move to California >>> Canada >>> Overseas somewhere more aligned with me."
- dctoedt 5y ago
  You created your account literally ten minutes ago, champ. Please re-read what I said: I was calling out the hypocrisy of the Texas GOP: Local control for me but not for thee. And "democracy" does not mean "democratic authoritarianism." (Or as the sour joke went about hard-line Islamist parties during the Arab Spring: One man, one vote, one time.)
- belltaco 5y ago
  >That's exactly right. That's what 'democracy' means...you vote, and sometimes you lose, but you still have to abide by the will of the voting mass that wins. Let the large cities in Texas decide if abortion should be allowed within city limits. That's totally possible if the state govt delegates powers to counties/cities. Oh wait, that's small govt but goes against the agenda so it will never happen. >There's something very entitled to the idea that "I support democracy as long as it advances my agenda. Otherwise (if I'm economically privileged), I'll move to California >>> Canada >>> Overseas somewhere more aligned with me." Not allowing this sounds like an abusive relationship, like a dictatorship like North Korea where people seeking to leave are killed. Just like the Taliban stopping people in Afghanistan from leaving. The new law also comes from an extremist view of a world religion so the argument has a parallel in that they take a dim view of people trying to leave the extremist religion adherence imposed on others.
BitwiseFool 5y ago
>"your right to have your representatives" Yes. That is at the heart of my belief in representative government. And it wasn't my representative alone who voted for this, it was enough of them to get it passed. I've already stated many times that I think this is an atrocious bill and I hope it gets overturned. But at the very least, it was passed by duly elected representatives and it appears to have withstood the courts (for now).
- dctoedt 5y ago
  OK, I take your point. But actions have consequences; if Apple or whoever wants to take their business elsewhere as a result, then that's their right — right?

locopati 5y ago

The state legislature can craft all the laws they want and businesses can decide they don't want to associate with those states in order to protect their employees. Actions have consequences.

Hermitian909 5y ago

Politics is fundamentally about how groups make decisions. Anything that influences group decision making has a political aspect to it. The status quo implicitly carries a set of norms that will impact group decision making and are thus political, this is hopefully apparent just looking at the differences between countries and their political norms. Indeed, it's hard to find anything that does not somehow touch on group decision making because so little is truly private e.g. want to have a loud party in your apartment? Whether societal norms approve or not will determine you can do that or whether you're forbidden to do that or allowed to potentially bother your neighbors; part of the group. Once properly framed, the idea is practically tautological. But even without that framing it's usually much more obvious for people for whom the status quo is a rough deal.

detaro 5y ago

In what way are your representatives limited in crafting laws by Apple? Should people and companies be forbidden to leave a state just because doing so could have consequences your representatives don't like?