Re:Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Re...
by jcoffland on Wednesday December 26, 2018 @03:48PM
(#18764747)
But that is ultimately a problem of monopolization.
Re:Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Re...
by whatshisface on Wednesday December 26, 2018 @04:37PM
(#18765160)
Peterson, Sam Harris and whoever else is involved would probably agree with you, they are now talking about setting up a competitor to Patreon. These people are real financial heavyweights and could probably do it.
Re:Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Re...
by voidpointercast on Wednesday December 26, 2018 @07:18PM
(#18766109)
And that should be the end of it. This whole debate is a nonissue if there exists an open market. If the ideas are big enough that discriminating against them disenfranchises a fair number of people, these people should have no trouble setting up an alternative that caters to their select 'views'.
Re:Patreon Bars Anti-Feminist for Racist Speech, Inciting Re...
by whatshisface on Wednesday December 26, 2018 @09:06PM
(#18766692)
>If the ideas are big enough that discriminating against them disenfranchises a fair number of people, these people should have no trouble setting up an alternative that caters to their select 'views'.
At the level of abstraction you're working on, you could say the same thing about LGBTQ or any other minority.
Although we all agree that this is legal to do (and nobody is thinking about taking Patreon to court), there is a second, more subtle social issue at play. Taking it to the extreme, if you live in a company town earning company scrip to spend at the company store, when the company decides that they don't like what you're doing in their place of business (organizing a union, perhaps), getting kicked out is functionally identical to a governmental sanction. As a result, even though the law permits companies to engage in heavy-handed social hedge-trimming, in some cases it can have the same problems as the government censorship that we have already agreed is bad. It would be going too far to say that corporations have an inalienable moral right to police whatever they control.