Should non-Democrats really support Net-Neutrality?

[Machismo]

Companies swing by popular opinion, they want profit. That's why this is happening in the first place. I'm just saying people shouldn't be okey with it. If people didn't support it, it wouldn't happen.

Then how do you suggest solving the issue?

[JohnBrown1917]

Companies swing by popular opinion, they want profit. That's why this is happening in the first place. I'm just saying people shouldn't be okey with it. If people didn't support it, it wouldn't happen.

This world does not have enough hardcore centrists for companies to consider that.

[Paranoid Android]

At least he's not a coastal eli-- wait, shit.

Well at least he's not a rich, corrupt assho-- dammit...

I mean, at least he's not some special snowflake with easily hurt feel-- GOD FUCKING DAMMIT

Add racist, white supremacist asshole.

[Jeezy911]

Sometimes i wonder if the bigots would be protesting for gay marriage if the liberals were against it...

Actually I know a lot of conservatives like myself who do not actually care about gay marriage. The problem is the left always doubles down: now I have to accept grown men in the little girls room, be against a local company who doesn't want to bake a cake for religious reasons, and allow children's parents to decide their gender as early as 6 years old.

[THE Bigzoman]

I think it is important in a sort of grand scale if you like, but if one is trying to build a broad based coalition to save Net Neutrality, why one part of that coalition also believes effectively "Well its okay powerful trusts whose wealth and connections make them immovable objects to censor as they will" will help.

If supporting Net Neutrality is effectively supporting Googles lordship over the internet, then I cannot see the coalition defending net neutrality holding out considering a sizable contingent of it can expect to be censored no matter who wins this battle.

In fact this is already a talked about tactic:


I think Google shouldn't have any power to curate or censor considering the centrality of its position on the internet and the overwhelming power its been granted.

- - - Updated - - -



Everyone says that until you say something they disagree with.

All the SJ types loved Laci and thought she made great content, until she disagreed with them.

Sounds nice in theory.

But it's impractical. What are we, as consumers and content creators going to do? Walk up to google and say "stop it or I'm gonna stop supporting net neuturality, as if our support makes a difference anyway?

[Levyan]

Yup, and let us unpack that first bit. Why should anyone outside of the Social Justice, Antifa, ect support net neutrality?

As you keep skipping the primary answer: Money. That's why. ISP's wouldn't censor much out of any moral cause probably, but rather to charge extra for acess sites we are currently allowed to access.

[Sorshen]

And of course Theo finds a way to make this a partisan issue. Sorry for thinking she was smarter than that. With this logic you're only gonna help google.

[Cthulhu 2020]

And of course Theo finds a way to make this a partisan issue. Sorry for thinking she was smarter than that. With this logic you're only gonna help google.

I might have been excited to read this thread if it was Theo from before two years ago.

Election season turned her into a bottom-of-the-barrel shit tier baiter.

[THE Bigzoman]

You know what?

If the trajection is true, that the Internet stops being the Wild West I grew to love, I don't give a fuck what happens to it. What's the point?

I'll let one python out to fight the other python like that shitty sci-fi movie.

[GennGreymane]

The trans people were already in the bathroom and you never had a problem. Republicans are the ones that made it an issue.
If you are in the service business you serve all of the public, seems simple.
No clue what your talking about here. Was this some sort of Brietbart fantasy about dey liburals?

Any other boogeymen you want to talk about?

also all the bathroom stuff was not even law. Target just did it on their own.... so Jeezy as usual is just being nonsense. Also linking gay marriage to parents doing shit... go figure.

[Slybak]

The first part is true. The issue is that by and large the leftist have made so many issues into identity politics. So now if you disagree with some particular policy or choice, you are obviously a Nazi, racist, homophobe, transphobic bigot...ect ect.

Name me a form of politics not predicated on some form of identity. "Identity politics," as the far-right calls it, are simply the politics of people heretofore excluded from the bounty of national life and are organizing to change it. The politics that you align with is arrayed against them for reasons either specious, vile, or both.

It's like this. If you keep yelling and screaming at people who aren't X that they are X because they don't agree with you, eventually enough of those people are just going to either join X or pretend to be X just to piss you off. Most people have experienced this in their life when they going through adolescence. We all hate it when someone tells us what we are thinking or why we are/were doing something adamantly yet being so completely wrong.

"Stop with all your nigger/wetback/kike/gook/faggot/cunt/tranny bullshit or I'll join the Aryan Nations and that'll REALLY show you" is, I suppose, a justification for Nazism, but its not one that ought to compel sympathy from any decent, civilized person.

That's not the people I'm talking about at all. Let me repeat this again: unless it breaks the law. If they're promoting murder and genocide, they're breaking the law. Someone that's trying to burn your house down is also breaking the law.

You forget what these people are like when they have any actual power with no accountability at your peril and, unfortunately, it won't simply be you who reaps the whirlwind. Your first moral obligation isn't to educate them, or enlighten them, or any other end result you think some abstract "free exchange of ideas" will produce; your first moral obligation is to stop them in the manner that's most expedient.

Saying "we should kill all black people" is vastly different to saying "I don't think abortion should be legal"

One is genocide and one is slavery. Different, yes, but inimical to any society that at the very least has the pretense of being free, as is demanding (certain) people treat law enforcement officers - people oathsworn to protect the liberty of others - like they're some kind of wild fucking animal who measures the difference between "murder" and "justice" in how much many hours of overtime they clock every week.

The example of Jordan Peterson that I mentioned earlier, that's the kind of thing I'm talking about.

Jordan "I'll treat you like a human being so long as you placate my wretched belief system" Petersen should have been booted out on his ass, if only for the mealy-mouthed attempt to justify his intent to discriminate against his students on "free speech" grounds.

[Theodarzna]

As you keep skipping the primary answer: Money. That's why. ISP's wouldn't censor much out of any moral cause probably, but rather to charge extra for acess sites we are currently allowed to access.

Exactly. It's a choice between amoral greed and a direct ideology.

- - - Updated - - -

Sounds nice in theory.

But it's impractical. What are we, as consumers and content creators going to do? Walk up to google and say "stop it or I'm gonna stop supporting net neuturality, as if our support makes a difference anyway?

Net Neutrality survives because of massive ground swells of people to support it. If the Groundswell is gone it weakens Net Neutrality.

- - - Updated - - -

And of course Theo finds a way to make this a partisan issue. Sorry for thinking she was smarter than that. With this logic you're only gonna help google.

Google and Silicon Valley is at least force to run protection money in the ISP's racket.

- - - Updated - - -

You know what?

If the trajection is true, that the Internet stops being the Wild West I grew to love, I don't give a fuck what happens to it. What's the point?

I'll let one python out to fight the other python like that shitty sci-fi movie.

That is effectively my point. If the internet is destined to be censored and curated, it might as well be by amoral greed than an ideological bent IMHO.

[Niroshi]

Not supporting Net Neutrality only guarantees that you give these companies the ability to snuff out Conservative websites.

[Theodarzna]

Not supporting Net Neutrality only guarantees that you give these companies the ability to snuff out Conservative websites.

They intend to snuff them out either way? Does it then matter?

[Torrasque]

I don't agree with this, and I don't want to pay more for what I already pay for. I support Net Neutrality.

[GennGreymane]

OP misunderstanding what net-neutrality means, how am I not surprised.

Already broke their logic loop and they are now ignoring me.

[Sormine]

OP misunderstanding what net-neutrality means, how am I not surprised.

Skimming through this thread it seems a dangerous amount of people have a severe misunderstanding what net neutrality is. Looks like partisan division has succeeded more than I thought.

[Glorious Leader]

Exactly. It's a choice between amoral greed and a direct ideology.

- - - Updated - - -



Net Neutrality survives because of massive ground swells of people to support it. If the Groundswell is gone it weakens Net Neutrality.

- - - Updated - - -



Google and Silicon Valley is at least force to run protection money in the ISP's racket.

- - - Updated - - -



That is effectively my point. If the internet is destined to be censored and curated, it might as well be by amoral greed than an ideological bent IMHO.

Thats really not actually the choice at all. Amoral greed is an ideology and is pushed as one. Ask the Kochs.

The choice is between openess and not. With isps throttling and shaping traffic youll get a closed internet. In an open internet youtube and google and godaddy may tell der strumer to go fuck itself but der sturmer can simple change hosts. Which it did.


You should all support net neutrality. If youre concerned that facebook and google are too big and exert too much influence thats fine. Thats a seperate issue that needs to be dealt with on its own terms. Not hey fuck net neutrality cause google is run by sjws.

[Niroshi]

They intend to snuff them out either way? Does it then matter?

I don't think you're right that they're going to be snuffed out under the current situation. For the sake of argument though why in god's name would you HELP them fuck you over?

[Cthulhu 2020]

Already broke their logic loop and they are now ignoring me.

Welcome to the club. Although it's not exactly a hard feat. The OP ignores everyone who points out the holes in their colander of an argument.

But there were bad people on both sides, both sides. I condemn the logic loops from both groups, everyone is responsible in this.