PayPal Bans YouTube Competitor Bitchute Without Explanation

[Suzanimal]

So you agree with him then that having a law that only protects special classes of people from such discrimination is better than having a law that protects everybody from the same discrimination?

Because we do NOT currently live in an environment where private enterprise is free to do as it pleases.

How about neither? Outside of enforcing contracts, government should have no say in who does business with who.

Is there current legislation to make it law that no one can be discriminated against? I sure as hell hope not. I really don't think the solution is to triple down on $#@!ery.

I believe in property rights and I believe in freedom of association. It's as simple as that.

[Suzanimal]

How is this situation free market? It's being 100% manipulated, not by government but by corporate agenda. I don't see how this is free market.

Suppose you own a cake shop and you bake great cakes in a great profitable location, that line you quote insinuates you will be successful because of your own destiny. But suppose your frosting supplier decides they don't want to sell to you anymore because you drive a Ford and their owner likes Chevy's. How can you still be successful with no frosting? Your argument in this thread is that it's ok even though Ford and Chevy have nothing to do with the supply chain or services agreed between your cake company and the frosting supplier. That is discrimination.

This is the case with Paypal and Bitchute. Bitchute did not ask for special treatment like non-gender binary financial services from Paypal, they took the services that Paypal offered to everyone. Paypal in turn decided to deny them for no apparent reason and that to you is free market?

I don't get the reasoning here.

Yes, once upon a time a Christian baker refused to bake a gay wedding cake. He did not refuse to sell a gay couple a cake. They were free to take what he offered, or not. That is free market.

Yes. That is exactly what a free market is.

In a free society, business owners, like homeowners, would have the right to run their businesses as they choose, including the right to refuse service. And that’s not all. In a free society, business owners would have the right to discriminate in their place of business on the basis of race, creed, color, religion, age, gender, height, weight, disability, attire, familial status, marital status, socioeconomic status, political preference, religious piety, national origin, appearance, odor, sexual orientation, or anything else, whether logical or illogical, reasonable or unreasonable, rational or irrational. It couldn’t be any other way and really be a free society.

https://www.fff.org/explore-freedom/...efuse-service/

[Swordsmyth]

How about neither? Outside of enforcing contracts, government should have no say in who does business with who.

Is there current legislation to make it law that no one can be discriminated against? I sure as hell hope not. I really don't think the solution is to triple down on $#@!ery.

I believe in property rights and I believe in freedom of association. It's as simple as that.

How do we get where you want to go?

Will allowing the left full freedom while letting them restrict everyone else get us there?

[specsaregood]

How about neither? Outside of enforcing contracts, government should have no say in who does business with who.

Me neither, but do you really see that happening, ever?

In the current environment some groups are more equal than others. And I dislike that even more.

[Suzanimal]

Me neither, but do you really see that happening, ever?

In the current environment some groups are more equal than others. And I dislike that even more.

No. Not in my lifetime.

I dislike it, too. It sucks ass but I was just sitting here thinking about what it would mean for me if no one could be discriminated against. How many bathrooms would have to be installed in the bar to accommodate all the $#@!ing genders out there? We would go broke.

Not being able to discriminate doesn't just effect (affect? I never get those right) Paypal - it would e(a)ffect every single business owner and you know it would be taken to the extreme. It would be so much worse than it is now.

[r3volution 3.0]

I really don't think the solution is to triple down on $#@!ery.

Well then you obviously hate freedom, America, and puppies.

[Suzanimal]

How do we get where you want to go?

I wish I had the answer.

Will allowing the left full freedom while letting them restrict everyone else get us there?

Of course not. I've never advocated for that but do you really think making everyone a protected class is the solution? You're just handing the douche bags more control than they already have.

[Swordsmyth]

Of course not. I've never advocated for that but do you really think making everyone a protected class is the solution? You're just handing the douche bags more control than they already have.

They have more power when they and their base are more equal than everyone else.

[Suzanimal]

They have more power when they and their base are more equal than everyone else.

Yes and with a handful of exceptions, they also control the government. Why on earth would you want to give them more power? If everyone's a protected class, where does it end?

I resent the fact that anyone thinks they have the right to tell me who I can and cannot do business with. SMDH

[Swordsmyth]

Yes and with a handful of exceptions, they also control the government. Why on earth would you want to give them more power? If everyone's a protected class, where does it end?

I resent the fact that anyone thinks they have the right to tell me who I can and cannot do business with. SMDH

They already tell us who we must do business with and then turn around and use their ability to not do business with anyone they please to gain even more power, they will use that power to continue to tell you who you must do business with.

The existence of a leftists aristocracy is just as bad as the government telling you who to do business with.

[Suzanimal]

They already tell us who we must do business with and then turn around and use their ability to not do business with anyone they please to gain even more power, they will use that power to continue to tell you who you must do business with.

The existence of a leftists aristocracy is just as bad as the government telling you who to do business with.

Yes that's the current situation and you don't see how making EVERYONE a protected class would kill what little control business owners are clinging to?

The leftists would have a field day and you'd just hand them that power. SMDH

[Swordsmyth]

Yes that's the current situation and you don't see how making EVERYONE a protected class would kill what little control business owners are clinging to?

The leftists would have a field day and you'd just hand them that power. SMDH

They are having a field day taking control of society by picking and choosing protected classes to suit themselves, maybe we could get the whole thing removed if everyone had to play by the same rules.

It's like the progressive income tax, those at the bottom get refundable tax credits and those at the top get loopholes, those in the middle will never be able to get rid of it as long as things remain that way.

If things remain the way they are the left will gain absolute control over society.

[Suzanimal]

[TheCount]

Yes that's the current situation and you don't see how making EVERYONE a protected class would kill what little control business owners are clinging to?

The leftists would have a field day and you'd just hand them that power. SMDH

The answer to too much state is even more state. When has that ever failed before?

[Swordsmyth]

@Suzanimal we both agree on the end goal but how are we to get there if the left takes over completely and imposes Neo-Feudalism with communist characteristics?

[Swordsmyth]

The answer to too much state is even more state. When has that ever failed before?

It's not more state, the state has already taken the power to tell us who we may do business with, it's equal protection under the law.

[CCTelander]

Yes that's the current situation and you don't see how making EVERYONE a protected class would kill what little control business owners are clinging to?

The leftists would have a field day and you'd just hand them that power. SMDH

Don't you see? We have to make the market less free so we can make it more free. It's so obvious. Logic in the age of Trump. Embrace it. It doesn't seem to be going anywhere.

[Suzanimal]

They are having a field day taking control of society by picking and choosing protected classes to suit themselves, maybe we could get the whole thing removed if everyone had to play by the same rules.

It's like the progressive income tax, those at the bottom get refundable tax credits and those at the top get loopholes, those in the middle will never be able to get rid of it as long as things remain that way.

If things remain the way they are the left will gain absolute control over society.

I get what you're saying but I disagree that making everyone a protected class will make things better. As a matter of fact, I suspect the opposite to be true.

Do you believe in property rights?

[Suzanimal]

@Suzanimal we both agree on the end goal but how are we to get there if the left takes over completely and imposes Neo-Feudalism with communist characteristics?

You seem to want to hand it to (unintentionally) want to hand it to them on a silver platter.

[CCTelander]

I get what you're saying but I disagree that making everyone a protected class will make things better. As a matter of fact, I suspect the opposite to be true.

Do you believe in property rights?

But, but, but property rights are much too important to leave them in the hands of mete business people, and the market is impotent to correct any of these issues because ... "leftists."

[Swordsmyth]

I get what you're saying but I disagree that making everyone a protected class will make things better. As a matter of fact, I suspect the opposite to be true.

I would prefer to simply make the government stop telling people who they can do business with and stop subsidizing connected corporations and stop using regulations to stifle competition but I think we will be a communist country before that ever happens.

Cutting off circulation to your leg with a tourniquet is bad UNLESS you are bleeding to death with a severed artery.

Things are already getting worse because the left has violated the status quo where corporations were politically neutral, I've said what I propose before, lawsuits for breach of contract and false advertising, I would also like to see competition arise to solve the problem but the system is rigged against that, I would like to see the CRA repealed and an end to government subsidies and regulation that gives the left unfair advantages.

But if that doesn't work then making the left play by the same rules as everyone else may be the only option, at least then they might agree to remove the mandates from everyone and they wouldn't get to control who gets to speak and be heard or who gets to buy and sell in the meantime.

Do you believe in property rights?

Absolutely, the left doesn't and they will use their Neo-Feudal government by crony corporation to end them completely for everyone else.

[Swordsmyth]

You seem to want to hand it to (unintentionally) want to hand it to them on a silver platter.

They already have it within their grasp, we might be able to reverse things if they don't get to fight with two hands while we fight with one tied behind our backs.

[Swordsmyth]

But, but, but property rights are much too important to leave them in the hands of mete business people, and the market is impotent to correct any of these issues because ... "leftists."

How are crony corporations that are subsidized and shielded from competition by the government distinguishable from government?

[Suzanimal]

I would prefer to simply make the government stop telling people who they can do business with and stop subsidizing connected corporations and stop using regulations to stifle competition but I think we will be a communist country before that ever happens.

Cutting off circulation to your leg with a tourniquet is bad UNLESS you are bleeding to death with a severed artery.

Things are already getting worse because the left has violated the status quo where corporations were politically neutral, I've said what I propose before, lawsuits for breach of contract and false advertising, I would also like to see competition arise to solve the problem but the system is rigged against that, I would like to see the CRA repealed and an end to government subsidies and regulation that gives the left unfair advantages.

But if that doesn't work then making the left play by the same rules as everyone else may be the only option, at least then they might agree to remove the mandates from everyone and they wouldn't get to control who gets to speak and be heard or who gets to buy and sell in the meantime.


Absolutely, the left doesn't and they will use their Neo-Feudal government by crony corporation to end them completely for everyone else.

Who do you think is going to write those rules?

[Swordsmyth]

Who do you think is going to write those rules?

I know, I know, but they are already doing it while allowed to be biased in ways the government is not allowed to be.

Why do you think they chose the Neo-Feudal route instead of just passing more laws and regulations?
When the official government is involved there is recourse in the courts and the ballot box so they must try to at least look "fair" but if they get to use the freedoms they deny us in the "private" sector while using government to stop the private sector mechanisms that are supposed to punish their behavior like loss of income and market share to competition then they get to have their cake and eat it too.

[Suzanimal]

I know, I know, but they are already doing it while allowed to be biased in ways the government is not allowed to be.

Why do you think they chose the Neo-Feudal route instead of just passing more laws and regulations?
When the official government is involved there is recourse in the courts and the ballot box so they must try to at least look "fair" but if they get to use the freedoms they deny us in the "private" sector while using government to stop the private sector mechanisms that are supposed to punish their behavior like loss of income and market share to competition then they get to have their cake and eat it too.

And you think they're going to write laws to limit themselves?

[Swordsmyth]

And you think they're going to write laws to limit themselves?

I don't expect anything good to happen unless there is a historic turning point of one kind or another but I see equality under the current bad laws as more achievable than any of the better solutions.

[Occam's Banana]

So you agree with him then that having a law that only protects special classes of people from such discrimination is better than having a law that protects everybody from the same discrimination?

Because we do NOT currently live in an environment where private enterprise is free to do as it pleases.

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

I sympathize strongly with what you and others are getting at, but just as "we do NOT currently live in an environment where private enterprise is free to do as it pleases", we also quite clearly do NOT currently live in an environment where "a law that protects everybody from the same discrimination" will amount to anything but rainbow-scented unicorn farts.

Given the current environment, what reasons are there to anticipate that such a law, as noble and fine-sounding as it may be in the abstract, will in the concrete not be selectively applied to the advantage of the powerful and politically connected, and will not be used routinely against the critics and enemies of the establishment? As far as I can see, there is none. It would just be one more tool in the tyrants' toolbox.

File under "There is a problem. A law is passed to fix the problem. Now there are two problems ..."

[Swordsmyth]

And you think they're going to write laws to limit themselves?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?

I sympathize strongly with what you and others are getting at, but just as "we do NOT currently live in an environment where private enterprise is free to do as it pleases", we also quite clearly do NOT currently live in an environment where "a law that protects everybody from the same discrimination" will amount to anything but rainbow-scented unicorn farts.

Given the current environment, what reasons are there to anticipate that such a law, as noble and fine-sounding as it may be in the abstract, will in the concrete not be selectively applied to the advantage of the powerful and politically connected, and will not be used routinely against the critics and enemies of the establishment? As far as I can see, there is none. It would just be one more tool in the tyrants' toolbox.

File under "There is a problem. A law is passed to fix the problem. Now there are two problems ..."

If we discount the possibility of libertarian solutions at this point (and I think we can agree they won't happen), the possibility of lawsuits for breach of contract/false advertising and the workability of passing a law to make them play fair then unless we are willing to just accept our new leftist aristocracy we only have 2 other options:

1 an armed revolution that includes an element of redistribution of property to rectify the stolen wealth that has enabled such domination of the government and marketplace.

Very dangerous and to be avoided while there are ANY other options


2 the public option, create a money storage/transfer system run by the Post Office or the Treasury Department that is required to serve everyone.

This would leave the "private" corporations to do as they pleased while preventing the left from creating a Neo-Feudal mark of the beast system where anyone they don't like is unpersoned BUT it is expanding the role of government.


What think ye of them?
Do we have any other options?

[Suzanimal]

I don't expect anything good to happen unless there is a historic turning point of one kind or another but I see equality under the current bad laws as more achievable than any of the better solutions.

Do you realize what compliance costs will be if everyone is a protected class? I imagine the only businesses that could shoulder them would be the big guys. What you're proposing would kill small business owners.

You're willing to make bad laws worse?