*** YOU HAVE DISABLED CSS; PLEASE RE-ENABLE THIS BEFORE CONTINUING ***

CAN 'BIG TECH' BAN FREE SPEECH

by   Nicholas de Lioncourt on January 12 2021 16:13 zulu

CAN 'BIG TECH' BAN FREE SPEECH?

I despise the State, that is to write Government, with an unyielding malevolence; and will never submit to this worship of government as paternal guardian.

But these actions do not violate the First Amendment -

Since the January 6th 2021 protests, less than one day into which 'intrepid patriots' abandoned all courage to run away, the most influential social media platforms - collectively 'BIG TECH' - have banned President Trump: Twitter, Facebook, Snapchat, Spotify, Twitch, Shopify and Stripe.

While others - Reddit, Pinterest, TikTok, YouTube - have imposed authoritarian resolutions announcing the mandatory, immediate removal of any sentiment written in support of President Donald Trump, his supporters, or a stolen election.

The sanctuary platform, Parler, has been removed from the Apple, Google, Amazon stores; and not long thereafter forcibly shut down by Amazon.

The response to tyrannical 'BIG TECH' has been lawsuits for reinstatement and indemnification, public demands of judicial and legislative retribution, and assertions that 'BIG TECH" has violated the First Amendment.

Violated the First Amendment? No.

The First Amendment guaranteed unalienable that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press..."

"CONGRESS shall make no law..."

The prohibition therein only applies to Congress; and to our disadvantage, Congress has made no mandate that 'BIG TECH' commit these offensives - and so - the incontrovertible truth is that 'BIG TECH' may at any moment independently restrict or forbid free speech at will. The citizenry has no recourse.

The Bill of Rights applies only to individuals; not organizations, and with the ascendency of Leftist reign, I suspect the courts will reinterpret this omission to conclude that while Congress may not legislate the speech of individuals, there are no such restrictions protecting organizations.

Some might understand this: individuals have negative rights; organizations have positive rights.

So what recourse remains against 'BIG TECH'? Other than vocal and written expressions of outrage, none.

Actions have Consequences, and submission IS ACTION OF INACTION.

When the January 6th 2021 protest in Washington D.C., was abandoned in less than one day.

When the participants exposed an absence of resolve & strategy, that other activists as BLM and ANTIFA demonstrated for months

When the participants descended to the chaotic tantrum of mob mentality, knowing well a weaponized double-standard would result.

When the January 6th 2021 protest was abandoned in less than one day, as the many thousands of participants ran away, then...

The Left, the Biden Administration, 'BIG TECH' all realized that their opposition's threats end in submission. The Left, the Biden Administration, 'BIG TECH' all realized the impotence of these protesters and, simply, lost all fear.

Actions - or the fear to take action - have consequences; and that 'BIG TECH' has initiated this 'war to silence' after January 6th 2021 is not coincidence.

 

LNDL

tags:

categories: government | opinion | rights

:: commenting is not enabled for this article