Home > Critical Thinking, Current Affairs, Dystopia, Musings, Philosophy sans Sophistry, Reason, Secular Religions, Skepticism, Technology > Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 1

Conflict Between Right Wingers and Tech Monopolies Won’t End Well: 1

Important: Please read this post in its entirety before commenting on it. The reason why I put this notice before writing even the first line of this post will be obvious once you start reading it.

So let us begin..

As many of you know, there has been a lot of talk and claims about whether censorship of large internet platforms by tech monopolies without even the tiniest hint of due process is a good idea or not. In case you haven’t noticed, I recently wrote a couple of posts about it (link 1, link 2) and think that it is an incredibly stupid and shortsighted idea. What I did not spell out explicitly in those posts is my belief that this extreme overreach by corporations based in SJW-istan, aka the Bay Area, will result in some incredibly problematic blow-back and reactions- of the kind that will soon make LIEbral idiots, who are still cheering for corporate monopolies to deplatform even more of their ideological rivals, regret coming up with idea in the first place.

But let us first be a bit more specific about what we are talking about. Many of you might have noticed that, since the 9th of November 2016, there has been a push by establishment democrats and contingent of useful idiot activists to use corporate power to go after “those republicans whose votes gave us Trump”. For example, there has been an unusually concerted effort by establishment democrats and dying corporate media to deplatform gun manufacturers and retailers from the highly oligopolistic financial network they created. It is funny how similar this approach is to failed attempts by american establishment to maintain its terminally declining power by imposing economic sanctions on various countries- from Russia and China to DPRK.

It does not take a genius to figure out that rest of the world (especially the parts which matter) are doing quite well in spite of these sanctions, which have unintentionally exposed the rapidly shrinking power of USA. Even very small countries, such as DPRK, have shown little interest in bargaining with USA. You might have heard that they just went ahead and tested their H-Bombs and ICBMs, before even having a formal meeting with USA. Only countries filled with spineless and white-worshiping idiots (such as India) have gone along with american establishment- so far. But what does any of this have to do with the topic of this post? As you will soon see, a lot.

Moving on to something which is similar and related- we have seen establishment democrats and their cadre of useful idiots go after something called “fake news”, which to be quite blunt can be applied to any piece of news or viewpoint one does not personally agree with. I am old enough to remember how anybody who challenged the official justifications for the failed occupation of Iraq in 2003 was labelled as an idiot or traitor by the corporate media. And we all remember how that worked out, don’t we? And who can forget all the other disastrous attempts at pushing narratives such as ‘there is no housing bubble’ as late as 2007 or how dietary carbohydrates were good for you while fats was bad for you- just to give a few of the more memorable examples of what was forcefully pushed by the corporate media as gospel truth.

An even more troubling, and more recent development, have been the willingness of LIEbral idiots to encourage and cheer on internet monopolies as they deplatform people with due legal process for “hate speech” as defined by whichever petty tyrant employed at said corporation is making the decision. Personally, I support the right of people to say whatever they want- no matter how hateful and unpleasant it sounds. Some of you might also be surprised to know that I not white. So ya.. I am perfectly fine with right of others to say hateful things even if I do not agree with it. In case you are wondering, I draw the line at actual and specific threats. For example: Person A wishing for the death of Person B, from say.. cancer, might be tasteless to some- but it is not illegal nor should it be illegal. But as we saw today, even something like this is now cause for suspension of Twitter accounts.

And this is a problem. Or to be more precise, this type of behavior by internet monopolies has the potential to cause all sorts of problems, blowback and downstream consequences far beyond what they themselves can imagine. Let me explain that sentence a bit more clearly. Some you may might have read ‘The Prince’ by Machiavelli in which he famously writes that it is better to be feared than loved- if one has to make a choice between the two. Most people seem to forget the part where he says that one should avoid being despised and hated (even if one is feared) because having people hate and despise you is how you will lose power or get assassinated. But what does this have to do with the ongoing behavior of internet monopolies?

Let us talk about what Machiavelli said about the reasons which drive the populace to hate and despise their ruler. According to him, taking the property and women (property) of populace by the prince (monopoly) because he thinks that he can get away with it (hubris) will make them hate him because people do not forget material insults. He goes so far as to say that men are more likely to forgive you for killing their parents than for taking from them what they own. According to Machiavelli, a prince (monopoly) who acts in a fickle, frivolous, effeminate, mean-spirited, irresolute manner will elicit contempt from the populace. In other words, depriving people of their property or livelihood and acting like an undependable bitch are surefire ways of losing the goodwill and support of your subjects.

But why does a prince require the support and goodwill of his subjects? I mean, since the prince is technically an autocrat, shouldn’t he be able to get away with anything? Well.. if you have read any history, you will know that rulers who did not take care of the needs of their population were usually the last ones of their dynasty- in addition to having short and troubled reigns. But why is that so? Why is it so important to not be hated and despised by the populace? The short answer is that deep public dissatisfaction with their rulers creates a fertile ground for external invasions, internal power struggles, attempts at assassination etc. But these are just second-order problems created due to a populace hating and despising their ruler. The central problem concerns progressive and irreversible loss of institutional integrity and stability.

In the next part of this series, I will write in more detail about why the wide range of individuals and groups affected by the capricious behavior of internet monopolies pose an unusual challenge to the continued existence of these monopolies. Some of you might heard a saying about the perils of making too many enemies at once, and how the course of events subsequent to making such a decision can be highly unpredictable and even harder to control. And hopefully, you will better understand what I meant by ‘it won’t end well’ and also why I put that warning about reading it in its entirety before commenting on it.

What do you think? Comments?

  1. P Ray
    August 17, 2018 at 6:39 pm

    Hee hee hee …
    When my Facebook account was suspended for talking about late-stage capitalism and MGTOW … and previously, no action was taken against American women calling me a “baby-raper” … well, I knew the end would be coming for a lot of men who talked plainly.
    It’s happening now to those white knights, and may the American decline be sudden and painful.

    As Martin Luther King said “injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere”.

    • August 20, 2018 at 12:41 pm

      Somewhat of a sidebar question, but what do you think about Cryptocurrencies and the (purported) ability of new blockchain projects to allow consumers new “decentralized” video/ social media/ internet access/ etc platforms that cannot easily censor people or be shut down? Do you think that’s even possible (they are talking about even making blockchain based hardware routers and all that jazz to keep various gov agencies from shutting it down)? Or is it just more scam vaporware shit (I know at least MOST blockchain projects are shit but are there a few legit ones or what? and what about even Bitcoin itself)?

      The concept of blockchain sounds good on paper and looks OK in the limited use we have seen till now. I am, however, not sure if it is going to be some “totally disruptive” technology. The odds are it won’t, and I have my reasons for that assumption.

      As far as internet decentralization is concerned, it is going to happen- one way or the other. We crossed the point of peak centralization in 2016-2017 and are going in the other direction.

      As far as bitcoin is concerned, think of it is a MLM-type situation where the early entrants (before bitcoin hit 100 $) got lucky but the later ones will get screwed. Of course, it is certainly possible that eventually something based on similar concepts might become mainstream. The core idea certainly has potential.

      • August 20, 2018 at 12:42 pm

        Wait I didnt mean for this to be a reply to PRay just a general comment

      • P Ray
        August 21, 2018 at 2:08 am

        Biggest issue with BitCoin is whoever controls the most nodes, controls the system in that they can say their transaction are “legit” and others aren’t.

        At this point in time most BitCoin nodes are in China.

        On the flip side I have heard some dopey people with no Computer Science background saying they can “hack cryptocurrency” … ya, sure you can, when you control all the nodes … until then you’re just a scammer … in other words, never in a quantillion years (ya, I know I mis-spelled) 🙂

  2. MikeCA
    August 18, 2018 at 8:39 pm

    Look, it is obvious that all this hand ringing over Alex Jones is simply conservatives working the refs. The point is to make Google, FaceBook and Twitter reluctant to deplatform any more conservative voices.

    Republicans have been working the refs for years with claims of liberal bias in the media. The result is the MSM media leans over backwards to avoid being accused of liberal bias.

    Everyone is opposed to censorship. Here is Glorious Leader calling for more censorship:

    • A.B. Prosper
      August 20, 2018 at 1:40 pm

      I’m not opposed to censorship unless the other guy is opposed to censorship to the same degree,

      Given the Left is not, its sound to fight fire with fire.

      Also part of the agreement was that we don’t hold these firms responsible for the vast amount if copyright infringement they facilitate , they don’t censor. Break a deal, face the wheel.

      • MikeCA
        August 21, 2018 at 4:58 pm

        “Also part of the agreement was that we don’t hold these firms responsible for the vast amount if copyright infringement they facilitate , they don’t censor. Break a deal, face the wheel.”

        Sites like YouTube and FaceBook do remove content for suspected copyright violations all the time. The process however is completely complaint based. Websites only get immunity from copyright liability if they remove any content when a credible copyright holder complains about it. You see lots of copyright violations because no one has complained yet.

        Removals for other causes, like nudity or threats of violence, are also complaint driven. The result is high profile people like Alex Jones generate a lot more complaints and get looked at more carefully. A relative unknown that has few viewers can get away with posting far worse because nobody complains.

        Given your background, I am surprised that you still pretend to believe that corporations give a crap about anything unrelated to their profitability or are somehow “honest” corporate citizens. And yes, that is what you are implying.

        The reality, as you well know, is that internet monopolies would be quite happy if they managed to “accidentally” destroy the business model of old media and entertainment companies- and put them six feet under.

  3. marlon
    August 19, 2018 at 4:15 pm

    “conservatives working the refs” …hmmm…are these refs liberal…or conservative?

    Are these refs going to listen?….please…!

    Fear not sir, at most you will get two terms of Trump, and then things will keep going the way you want it.

    For I don’t agree with AD; the so-called conservative, or right, is merely a soft boiled leftist… and they will bow down.
    At most…they will complain loudly and that’s it.
    If the economy goes then there will be trouble but if it continues this gentle slide…any real violence is decades away.

    • Shiningtime
      August 19, 2018 at 8:30 pm

      I agree with you. As long as the average white American is fat and happy America will trudge on. No surprise that so much effort goes into keeping them happy and passive

      And that is what has changed.. by a lot.

  4. Shiningtime
    August 19, 2018 at 8:26 pm

    I don’t get why you can’t seem to understand that the people who were censored have not had their freedom of speech violated. Why is it so difficult to distinguish between constitutional rights and the rights of a business?

    Alex Jones has not been gagged. The government has not black bagged him or seized his assets. He is perfectly free to continue broadcasting his ideas. What has changed is that many of the largest internet social platforms have decided to not be a conduit for his lies, bigotry and extreme fear-mongering.

    YouTube and others are under no obligation to provide ANY individual a platform to say whatever they want. Can I walk into Coca cola bottling plant and tell them to distribute my homemade soda along with their own and at their expense too?

    YouTube is a functional monopoly as are FakeBook and Google. Either we recognize that fact and regulate them or break them into a thousand pieces. Alternatively, the course of events will take care of them.. though that process won’t be nice.

    • Shiningtime
      August 20, 2018 at 9:04 am

      You’ve shifted the goal posts. Now you’re arguing they are a monopoly. You’ve seemingly abandoned your assertion that Alex Jones has had his 1st amendment rights violated.

      Because, a private communication monopoly has no more right to ban speech than the government. If there were ten different YouTubes in a competitive market, you can still make argument that one or two of them banning that guy does not violate his free speech.

      Another way to think of this is by asking yourself why the Bell telephone monopoly could not deny telephone connections to MLK Jr and other civil right activists because they did not agree with their speech. Hint.. it had something to do with it being regulated as a monopoly.

  5. marlon
    August 20, 2018 at 2:19 am

    Agree with AD on this:

    “YouTube is a functional monopoly as are FakeBook and Google. Either we recognize that fact and regulate them or break them into a thousand pieces. Alternatively, the course of events will take care of them.. though that process won’t be nice.”

    They should be regulated.

  1. August 19, 2018 at 5:35 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: