Staff Writer, DL Mullan
Bill of Rights / Due Process
Hate speech. The made up terminology to create hysteria against certain groups in society. This phrase is leveled at objectionable people most individuals would disagree with so there is no one to stand up for the other people's rights. That is not very American of you.
We are speaking of Big Tech monopolies who hire many foreign workers who do not know or care about Truth, Justice, and the American way. These foreign employees care about their paychecks, not their moral or ethical obligations to working in this country.
So first they came for the NeoNazis, and we said nothing. Then they came for the White Nationalists, and we said nothing. Afterward, they came for the White Separatists, and we said nothing.
All the while, the technological monopolies were going down their hit lists to censor people far and wide, and label them hate speakers. Laura Loomer. Owen Shroyer. Mike Cernovich. These journalists and commentators have felt the pinch. The biggest strike has been against Alex Jones.
The Terms of Service states... Hate Speech to be banned and all those who spread it.
One problem. There is no legal definition of Hate Speech because there is no Due Process of Law that covers the blatant disregard of the First Amendment and its protections of the Public Square, set forth by the Supreme Court.
So where are the Big Tech monopolies getting their legal advice? Rice crispies treats?
Terms of Service is a way for corporations to be your parent because to them you are too immature and untrustworthy to be free to express yourself. Is that really their call? Or is it an underlying negative attitude toward the public? Hate speech, shadow banning, and outright banning of people with ideological differences has no basis in legal precedent. None at all.
So Terms of Service has become the gray area of corporate legalese to eradicate Due Process of Law. Someone threatens with the intent to harm or calls for violence against someone(s), legal action via due process can be initiated. Until someone crosses the line into criminal behavior there is little for corporations like Big Tech to do about free expression or speech on their platforms.
These companies can offer unfriend, mute, and block.
Anything else should be pursued by the individual, not the corporation until a legal judgement has been rendered. The legal way is not always the quickest, cleanest, or clearest way, but it is the path of our judicial system.
But, but Citizens United made corporations equal with their free speech, in addition, Pruneyard Shopping Center v. Robins is outdated law and Big Tech monopolies are not shopping malls.
The internet is the new public square and we have got to set some rules.
First, the internet was created with American tax payer money. So whatever happens on the internet should be subject to our Bill of Rights, especially since most of the technology being used on the internet today including insular platforms was created with American tax payer money.
See, DARPA, and maybe some IARPA too.
So the Big Tech monopolies do not really have much legal legs to stand on. The internet is the public square. Your platform is open to the public. Big Tech monopolies have stated in the past that their platforms were public forums.
Big Tech cannot have it both ways.
You are either a paid private platform you control, or you are a public forum where the Bill of Rights is enacted.
No legal wrangling is going to give Big Tech free reign to abuse its already considerable power over the market shares.
So what do Americans do? Call for the Ma' Bell Solution? Break up all the technology companies until free and fair competition can operate? That is probably the best option.
Because Big Tech has become what they hate with the absolute power they wield: mean, useless bullies.
The 1st Amendment protects someone's speech if we agree with it or not. Without adherence to the rule of law, we are virtue signalling permission for a corporation to be an information gatekeeper. As a gatekeeper, media, internet platforms, and politicians have allowed censorship into our public discourse. This censorship is a prime example why corporations especially media need to stop playing god.
Instead of information and investigative journalism, mainstream media now promotes propaganda and conspiracy theories, yet media outlets feel it is their right to tell the public what they can and cannot read, do, or say... that is an eye opening illustration, is it not?
We have a huge problem in this country and it starts with the gatekeepers. Americans need to reject censorship in all forms. Hate speech isn't a legal term; it's a psychological and emotional trigger phrase to make people reactionary instead of thinking for themselves
Americans have to get back to the basics. The only way to censor is to take said offenders to court and prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they have committed a criminal act. Corporations are not following due process of law. Internet platform monopolies believe they are the law. Big, huge, elephant in the room PROBLEM.
Corporations have stepped over the line with the public. Corporations should never be in control of people's lives. Corporations should never parent the public. That is a breach of the public trust.
In other words, take your supposed tolerance back to your safe space, it has no business in the adult room. The public square in a mall or internet forum is the adult room. The only ones acting like children are Big Tech monopolies hiding behind their Terms of Services to satisfy some immature need to control what the public says and thinks.
That makes Big Tech censorship a form of hate speech.
... and then they came for the technology monopolies, there was no one left to speak for them.