I've noticed all the Alex Jones fans have suddenly turned to commies since he was banned everywhere

ive never actually met a real autistic person online, can you confirm and make my day?

Attached: 1533906783095.png (1002x768, 574K)

>google and facebook takes massive amounts of government dollars in contracts/subsidies
>they do not fall under the typical private entity status and thereby can be regulated differently than a normal company
to what extant they can be regulated will be dictated soon by the court system

if they take down infowars.com i'd agree with you.
truth is he not being silenced at all.
it's like he's been kicked out of a bar because the owner doesn't like him.

jones is a zionist shill. here's proof: youtube.com/watch?v=xKqbMYXAYow

is there some case related to this in court now?
that would be interesting.

america is corporatist. corporate censorship is state censorship.

Okay so we can ban Jews and niggers from our businesses then? Got it.

These companies are run by far-left Californians. Of course it's political. Jack Dorsey (CEO of twitter) it was political.

he's not banned from watching youtube, he was a youtube partner and content creator.
So yes you have the right not to partner with jews and niggers or allow them to hang posters in your stores.

>far-left companies
that's not a thing. they are just companies with responsibilities to their shareholders, just like all companies.

the only one who has fucked up is jones who didn't build his own media distribution platform. thinking the people you call "lizzard space vampire child fuckers" would let you use their services is fucking naive

>still doesn't understand what the word "snowflake" means when used as an insult

Attached: 1393861433893.gif (245x220, 551K)

Report rulebreaking troll threads

Attached: Da Rules.png (607x788, 446K)

right. he really should have put effort into making his own site and platform where most of his content is consumed, then he would be having any problems.

1. What's hypocritical is that leftists are up in arms all of a sudden defending "a private company's right to do what it wants" when that company does something they agree with even though they've railed on against a private company's right to choose for years

2. I would unironically support Stalin type old communism before Id support the SJW left of today

3. I think we do need an update to our laws to reflect the reality of the internet. Companies should not be allowed to block free speech online. I never claimed to be pro capitalist on fact capitalism is very anti white

This

>thread about free speech and politics
how is this rulebreaking?

>that company does something they agree
i'm not a leftist and i don't agree with banning him.
i wouldn't have. But it's not limiting his free speech is what i'm saying

This

If they take tons of money from the government aka money from the taxpayers (which includes Alex Jones and his viewers) they should be treated differently. Why should someone be forced to essentially pay for something they're banned from?

Except that bar isn't taking taxpayer subsidies aka my money

That would be like being banned from a bar but still having to fund the bar (other than if you owed a tab or something)

>if you're not a corporatist who enables clinical psychopath CEOs to violate basic human rights then you're a COMMIE
Reminder this insanity should have been made illegal years ago.

It's not limiting his free speech under current laws

I'm saying the laws need to change especially when these companies have had government subsidies. Either that we need to bring in antitrust laws and break apart the virtual monopolies that companies like google have

there are two lawsuits currently filled...will take a while if one or both make it to circuit courts which is where we usually court cases in the media

motherjones.com/politics/2013/10/timeline-technology-silicon-valley-government-subsidies/
Their companies exist only due to government funds. They're basically public entities.

STFU Commie ahhaha all the free market faggots BTFO

That's capitalism. When you own something, you own the content and everything it produces. Check the fine print of anything you sign when you get a job, what you put out is theirs. If you use their product to communicate, they have the right to deny you service if they don't like what you're communicating. They aren't the U.S. postal service. Just like if you own a building with a cork board, you aren't obligated to tolerate every flier someone tacks up.

>being a this much of a bootlicking faggot

Get hanged, cabrone.

>Political interests conspiring to control all major media platforms and censor anything that doesn't fit the agenda.

Its just the free market goy!

Attached: Jew Post.gif (480x270, 1.05M)

Attached: dsd1.jpg (1196x2312, 486K)

you'd be in jail

Attached: hrc1.jpg (1200x713, 150K)

google and those other companies have close ties to the government.

zuckerkike didn't even want to ban Jones but the pressure from the Dems aka government was too much.

Obviously, that's the problem. USPS as a provider of Internet services would have prevented this from happening. The selling off of public space must be reversed or this sort of thing will BE our lives going forward.

>commies are people who disagree with me
Nice of you to make it transparent, Democrat shill.

heh

Libertarians and ancaps BTFO

government intervention in the freemarket is communism to a right-winger
i am not saying this. libertarians say this or imply this

making facebook and youtube public utilities would be classified as communism according to the definition of communism used by libertards.
if this had been a website run by conservatives and liberals were being censored, the right would be defending the website on property rights grounds.

i notice conservatives are inconsistent when they are the ones victims of their own ideology.

if you believe in the freemarket, then facebook and youtube have a right to delete alex jones's accounts

i don't believe in freemarket capitalism as conservatives do, so i don't have to make the argument for why private companies can't censor him.

Attached: ec568a415ac7f83d84c3abc79f262b525ebfafbf_hq.jpg (744x960, 57K)

>Wanting anti-trust style laws is communism

Ok......

>lowering the bar for censorship to this point
And when they take down infowars.com you'll say:
>the host is a private company
The whole "free market" concept relies on competition, this is clear collusion.

It's almost as if cooperation is a more natural impulse than competition, despite the screeching of Austrianfags.

Attached: 1513266214717.png (363x475, 89K)

You think you're clever, but you're not. America has had anti monopoly laws from the beginning and the First Amendment protects free speech including social media.
These cunts need to be smacked down a peg or two.

Attached: I’ve got a license.png (336x349, 31K)

even still, he could move hosts. and even if all hosts banned him, self hosting with his money would not be hard.
He could also have his site on the deep web which i actually think would be excellent for his brand. who knows, he might even do that.
But no i think taking down his site would be a totally different matter.

>the deep web
Eventually this is where we'll all end up

first amendment protects free speech from government, not free speech from private companies. A guy who works for a newspaper can't write whatever he wants in the newspaper and not expect to get fired

I agree, and i think the internet will be a better place for it since no one can ban anyone and thus this won't even be an issue.
plus if everybody was using tor it would get much better really fast.

>He could also have his site on the deep web which i actually think would be excellent for his brand
fuck off kike
>yess goyim, go on the part of the internet where literally nobody goes
tick tock faggot, your time is running out
your precious tech companies are going to get raped

Fuck off red.

>your precious tech companies are going to get raped
how? may i ask?

Of Course they can but the way it was handled was bs, he was removed partly by the lefts braindead minions engaging en mass flagging his content cause he was mean and scary ,
this wasnt a solely corporate decision

So this means you’re allowed to refuse to bake a cake for degenerate faggots? You know, a private non-government business and all that. Either the first amendment applies to private businesses, or it doesn’t. You don’t get to pick and choose.

>far-left companies
>that's not a thing.
Wrong.
Leftists are hypocrites, there's literally no reason to believe they would not infiltrate and use large corporations for their own ends.

>part of the internet where literally nobody goes
that's because most people have no reason to go there as all they want can currently be found on the clear web. when that starts to change, people start going there.
Build it and they will come.

It'll be extended to social media. We've done this before.
>A guy who works for a newspaper can't write whatever he wants in the newspaper and not expect to get fired
Except that's not what's happening. If the guy who works for a newspaper is fired because he's a conservative and writing conservative pieces, then it's a violation of his right to free speech.

Don't even pretend this isn't being done to censor based on political leanings.

bad analogy. they didn't refuse him service, they banned him from using their platform to make money. two very different things.
He can still visit youtube.

Private? You mean highly govt sponsored enterprises.

so how are they leftist?

>Reminder that in a capitalist society, private companies are allowed to ban, delete, remove anyone they see fit for any reason.

Nooooot exactly.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Breakup_of_the_Bell_System

People shouldn't forget that Alex Jones isn't the first. Twitter, Facebook and Youtube have been shadowbanning conservatives or hiding their content for muh hate speech or whatever bullshit they pull out of their ass to justify censorship.

They removed his account. So again I ask, if I’m a baker am I allowed to say “sorry, my religion says you’re a degenerate, so in accordance with the first amendment I’m not baking you a wedding cake” if I still allowed the degenerates to be inside my store, and even offered to bake them something non-wedding related?

Correct. See Akre v. New World Communications

They're not leftists. They're bourgeois liberals.
Know your enemy, don't take rich neoliberal kikes' word for it.

Facebook or any other Internet provider or service isn't classified as a public utility, however. Thank Pajeet Pai for that.
I'm telling you. Post Office Internet. It's the only way to be sure we always have access to our legal rights.

Fuck you faggot commie . This will all backfire on these monopolies in the form of a nice big AntiTrust Suit. So yeah get fucked shill.

Attached: lkkk.jpg (640x338, 24K)

Also, the economic left (WSWS, Peter van Buren, Venezuelanalysis). It's almost as if they were working on behalf of the corporate Democrat establishment.

>Reminder that in a capitalist society, private companies are allowed to ban, delete, remove anyone they see fit for any reason.
Fuck off with your Alinsky tactics, you dirty rat-faced rotten kike. Go suck a Kippah and die, and take your rotten Scandinavian cuck states with you, you nation-wrecking garbage trash person.

After Alex Jones I am personally committed to the death of all Jews. I will seek political and economic power and via overt or subtrefuge dedicate my fortune and success to the suffering of jews and their spawn. The synagouge of Satan shall be brought to cinders and ash by white victory. Death to all Jews.

If you are Jewish leave Jow Forums, or better yet cut off your testicles and never breed. You are a plague on society. Anyway this thread is fake and gay, fuck jews.

Attached: ranger-smith-hey-there-its-yogi-bear-46.6.jpg (210x240, 19K)

I have no problem with Big Tech banning anyone they wish as a private company. They just have to accept legal liability for the content of EVERYTHING posted on their no longer "just a platform" private property. Deal?
Meanwhile, we're be busy forging the new world with our own truly free decentralized platforms and herding the normies off their reserveration. There is no censorship where we're going faggot. The Jew will be named. The blockchain is the new oven.

Attached: 1533446231683.jpg (900x516, 80K)

Marsh v Alabama. If you own the public square you can't shut down free speech on it.

>religion
not touching that spaghetti mess of an analogy

>government intervention in the freemarket is communism to a right-winger
Wrong.
Lolbertards do not have a monopoly on the right, in fact they are leftists in the context of the traditional right/left paradigm.

The whole idea of stereotypical enlightenment inspired lolbertardianism is predicated on the idea of upstart merchant classes redistributing the property of the Crown and being granted freedom to use politically seized Crown property without oversight. It's literally proto-communism, in fact the red flags we contemporaneously associate with Marxism were actually inherited from the red flags of revolutionary French republicanism.

>They just have to accept legal liability for the content of EVERYTHING posted on their no longer "just a platform"
since they have never been classified as common carriers, this has always been the case.

We don't have pure capitalism you dumb cunt. There's patents, unions, government welfare programs, etc.
Just as there's no pure democracy. This country is a constitutional republic.
I have no idea how your non-country works. They obviously don't do a very good job with education though.

Attached: 1521688531018.jpg (557x854, 93K)

>It's not limiting his free speech under current laws
It absolutely is.

Your going to remember this moment Iceland user.
Remember the moment you said :"it's okay, they're a private organization"

You'll be a colony very soon >:)
Thru economy takeovers

Attached: 30073168_112178846307520_253234835121338229_o.jpg (2000x1800, 267K)

alex jones would have me banned if i posted liberal crap all over his website. would he be violating my freespeech?

he would do the same thing to me as facebook does to him. i should get myself banned from infowars just to prove my point

Attached: golden-tate.jpg (680x440, 49K)

I've noticed when the President blocks assholes on Twitter it's taken to court and ruled to be a violation of free speech.

But YouTube, Twitter and Facebook can outright ban people and its some how not.

Attached: YnTnQ0fh_400x400.jpg (375x375, 20K)

In Indiana, a private business can reject service for any reason no questions asked. Casinos are the same way, they can literally turn anyone way for any reason. If they don't want your business, they dont have to let you be there. So before you try to sound educated, get your facts straight.

i might troll infowars by defending youtube's right to ban him on his own website. i bet they'll ban me

capitalism is against monopolies

yeah but it would be funny if Trump broke up all the Silicon Valley companies lmao

Infowars is not the biggest social media platform from which if you get banned you basically disappear from society

>anti-trust
Sure kid. But the discovery phase of that suit would be Extremely Interesting. Who knows how many Democrat shills one might find. Which is why there won't be a suit.

That decision would almost certainly be reversed by today's Court. Aside from that, Facebook seems to take pains to avoid any character of a "more traditional settlement": they don't call themselves public, they don't have the characteristics of a "more traditional settlement" such as anonymity or free passage.

So, basically communism for the bourgeoisie, law of club and fang for their "inferiors". But none dare call it feudalism.

anarcho-capitalism is not against monopolies because there would be no state to break them up. it's implied

an anarchocapitalist would probably pretend like the state is censoring him like alex jones does.

People posted all kinds of garbage all over the comment section of infowars. I'd tell you to go take a look but disqus banned him too.

And nothing of value was lost.

Got to love control freaks like you. Your freedumbs don't apply on a platform I've created snowflake.
>Muh freedumbs of speech.

you think the GOP will just stand back and let them be censored?

>it's okay
never said it was okey
>Thru economy takeovers
we already are and have been for a while.

He clearly still has a platform if all these people are bitching about it.

It really isn't limiting his speech. He signed a ToS that's the end of it.

Yeah but what these companies are doing is possibly illegal.
Since they are colluding in a cartel style structure.
And anyway yet again the leftard strawman that the right supports unethical unrestrained business.
What a fucking joke you retards are.

Actually, it’s the free market. If hosting this clown will cost them sponsors and money, they should not be obligated to host him

read

>in a capitalist society, private companies are allowed to ban, delete, remove anyone they see fit for any reason.
No, they're not.