uhh not sure how you are interpreting what I said as advocating for the government or paypal? it's clearly the opposite.
I thought you were suggesting that PayPal's actions should be illegal.
well it's more of a free speech issue to me. 1A. subjective issues when violence is called for is one thing, but ultimately I don't think speech should be policed. wanting paypal to not be able to enforce their version of acceptable speech is not an endorsement of an even larger government.
wanting paypal to not be able to enforce their version of acceptable speech is not an endorsement of an even larger government.
That's precisely what it is. There's only one way to prevent PayPal from enforcing their version of acceptable speech, and that's by using the government to prevent them from doing it. Since that's something the government cannot do today, it will require increasing the government's power to allow them to do that tomorrow. That's how we keep giving them more power and fueling more bureaucrats an inch at a time. Then 100 years later we're bitching about a massive bureaucratic state with enormous power over our lives as if we didn't create it.
(post is archived)