4 ms·
That's a good counterpoint, I guess the obvious question is why your viewpoint is opposed. Medical marijuana lobbyists have an easy, obvious answer: impediment
by LeifCarrotson 5y ago
That's a good counterpoint, I guess the obvious question is why your viewpoint is opposed.
Medical marijuana lobbyists have an easy, obvious answer: impediments are the result of a failed and ill-considered war on drugs that's actively causing lots and lots of harm. It's easy to see yourself as virtuous in that scenario.
Anti-privacy lobbyists have to go through more difficult mental contortions: large movements of people are concerned about the privacy invasions our devices represent, and that puts our future profits at risk. People are very capable of being irrational when their paycheck depends on it, but that feels too far to me.
- judge2020 5y agoThat's going into arguments on merit, though. The point is that trying to influence regulation shouldn't be seen as an issue. Berate the company for doing something you're against, but everyone has a voice, even corporations with more money to influence congress than the average person.
- mitigating 5y agoWhat if corporations are acting against the public good the majority of the time and there aren't alternative methods of stopping this (boycotts don't work etc). It's better to ban it since it's mostly evil.