The only reason they are as powerful as they are is explicitly because the government gave them monopolitic power in the first place. These public companies exist at the behest of their government regulators to gain tax income for the government. Monopolizing the economy guarantees government control over the economy. The largest businesses do not compete with the government, they're the same damn thing.
Corporations don't have to corrupt the thing that grants them the right to exist.
I think that rule is really lacking. As best as I can remember his top level post, it was accusing jews of being to blame for some thing. That isn't the same as accusing them of conspiring. I can accuse my in-laws of doing something bad without them needing to have conspired it into action.
Maybe I'm wrong? No one knows but you now so the opportunity for me to potentially find I was mistaken is stripped.
Also, I would like the opportunity to discuss the use of labels with some of our members and it becomes impossible to do so organically when my opportunities are deleted.
So here's a proposition of compromise: get wordfilters as a mod power. Rule16 is there for the longevity of our survival, I get it. But straight deletion? I think it'd be sufficient to delete or change the offending word (and we have banned words within certain contexts, let's not pretend otherwise). Doing this would allow for bystanders to learn from secondhand experience what some of our rules actually mean by granting them contextual examples that no longer break the rule.
Wordfilters get used often on imageboards for moderation purposes and also jokes. Normally it's done to auto-translate site-wide one phrase to another phrase. 4chan filters the word "soy" to "onions" for example (long story). To be clear, I'm not suggesting you make a site-wide filter. I'm suggesting you force an edit on posts marked for deletion where it can be solved by changing one word.
Would that post have been okay using a euphemism like "vampire"? If it were something benign like "cats" it would surely pass.
To bystanders: yes, inviting spez shit sounds dumb as fuck, but I'd rather that than entire posts get nuked.
Corporations exist at the convenience of the government. That's why you have to legally create them using a government bureaucracy.
Have you ever seen a sole proprietorship have this kind of power and scope?
They couldn't be this powerful without having corrupted the government to give them monopolistic power over the competition and spending bill pork.
Libertarianism enables this bullshit
There is a solution, and Antifa, libtards and libertarians will cry Fascism.
It's the only way to stop these Jews and Megacorporations from raping the world.
It does the exact opposite of that.
The only reason they are as powerful as they are is explicitly because the government gave them monopolitic power in the first place. These public companies exist at the behest of their government regulators to gain tax income for the government. Monopolizing the economy guarantees government control over the economy. The largest businesses do not compete with the government, they're the same damn thing.
Corporations don't have to corrupt the thing that grants them the right to exist.
Comment Reported for: 16: Identity attacks
Comment Removed
I think that rule is really lacking. As best as I can remember his top level post, it was accusing jews of being to blame for some thing. That isn't the same as accusing them of conspiring. I can accuse my in-laws of doing something bad without them needing to have conspired it into action.
Maybe I'm wrong? No one knows but you now so the opportunity for me to potentially find I was mistaken is stripped.
Also, I would like the opportunity to discuss the use of labels with some of our members and it becomes impossible to do so organically when my opportunities are deleted.
So here's a proposition of compromise: get wordfilters as a mod power. Rule16 is there for the longevity of our survival, I get it. But straight deletion? I think it'd be sufficient to delete or change the offending word (and we have banned words within certain contexts, let's not pretend otherwise). Doing this would allow for bystanders to learn from secondhand experience what some of our rules actually mean by granting them contextual examples that no longer break the rule.
Wordfilters get used often on imageboards for moderation purposes and also jokes. Normally it's done to auto-translate site-wide one phrase to another phrase. 4chan filters the word "soy" to "onions" for example (long story). To be clear, I'm not suggesting you make a site-wide filter. I'm suggesting you force an edit on posts marked for deletion where it can be solved by changing one word.
Would that post have been okay using a euphemism like "vampire"? If it were something benign like "cats" it would surely pass.
To bystanders: yes, inviting spez shit sounds dumb as fuck, but I'd rather that than entire posts get nuked.
Go to Reddit, Commie