4 ms·
> However, we have freedom of association, and a business may not want to associate with someone who has opinions counter to their own. I think this part is wh
by drewbeck 4y ago
> However, we have freedom of association, and a business may not want to associate with someone who has opinions counter to their own.
I think this part is why there’s so much angst about this these days: businesses have captured a huge part of our commons and our support systems, pieces that might have been (or could be) the purview of government at other times. If we’re all paying dues to BigCorp in order to live, is it fair to say “businesses can choose to not associate with whomever they want”?
- livueta 4y agoThis line of thought always reminds me of Marsh v. Alabama: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama > a state trespassing statute could not be used to prevent the distribution of religious materials on a town's sidewalk even though the sidewalk was part of a privately-owned company town Are we at that point of broad-spectrum BigCo dominance yet? I'd say probably not, but sometimes it just seems like a matter of time.