This is actual election interference
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (20)
sorted by:
Kinda unrelated, but I'm kinda sick of this buzzword that leftists started to push about private entities engaging in "election interference" because ultimately it comes with the implicit baggage that therefore Something™ needs to be done about this and that the entity to do this Something™ is always some government agency. And I'm just sick of the endless growth of the state, as if it will ever turn out to be anything less than a tool to help further reinforce the establishment and never let anyone else in.
Don't like this shit? Sure, expose it and call it out. But don't fucking expect the government to fix it. Stop using these companies, stop giving them your business, and look for alternatives that don't pull this shit. We need more situations like the Digg Exodus and less situations where people shrug their shoulders and behave like it's all pointless and powerless.
At what point should a service or collection of services run by American corporate entities be considered a defacto public square subject to the bill of rights or at least some kind of transparency and expectations of how they run? What if all the actual streets in the country were private and owned by one corporation, say, Amazon. Would it be ok to say "No you're not allowed to protest except on the 20% of streets not owned by Amazon. Yes they can selectively prevent competitors from driving over 20mph. We don't want big government."? Exposing it is good, but then what's the solution? I already don't use Google.
There shouldn't be any companies that dominant because of trust busting. But when's the last time the government exercised that responsibility?
Counterpoint: There shouldn't be any companies that dominant because government programs are what build these companies up. Just look at how many benefits, tax breaks, incentive programs and more Amazon alone get. Look at how cities have literally tried to throw money at Amazon to get them to open a warehouse in their city (the rationale being that they provide jobs). And it's not limited to a handful of companies. The entire aviation industry is BUILT upon this system. How many times have airline companies been bailed out? What about the pharma industry that is, yet again, propped up by government market interference?
These companies become dominant because of market interference. They become dominant through literally uneven ground. The idea of a free market doesn't exist when bailouts, tax breaks and financial incentives are as common as they are. Is the market "free-er" than other markets out there? Absolutely. But an argument in relativity means nothing when discussing objective measures. And the reality is that growing economic divide and a lack of economic mobility are directly caused through government market forces, not a lack-there-of.
Trust busting is a result of government losing control of what they themselves created. It's got nothing to do with protecting the public.