How Meena Harris, Niece Of US VP Kamala Harris, Opposing Indian Farm Laws, Is Becoming A Problem For White House. The Swarajyamag article is meant to mislead their readers counting on their limited knowledge of US politics. A short thread below: swarajyamag.com/world/how-meen…
Meena Harris’ aunt Kamala Harris is very close to US celebrities and Corporates. Most of the leading Democrats, particularly the California Democrats are. Meena Harris is following her aunt’s path here +
Meena Harris’ plug of Rana Ayuub is hardly a problem for White House. Rana Ayuub is the India columnist of Washington Post. WaPo had blatantly supported Biden starting from the Democratic primaries.
In February 2020 when Sanders’ was in contention for Democrat nomination, Washington Post ran a leak that Russia was supporting Sanders washingtonpost.com/national-secur… That was a considerable blow for Sanders since he was part of the narrative that Russia helped Trump win 2016.
The Washington Post piece paved the road for Biden’s win in the Democrat primaries. And after Biden won the Democrat primaries, Washington Post’s support for him throughout his campaign against Trump is too extensive to compile in a Twitter thread.
Biden is the chosen candidate of Washington Post (and most other Corporate media units). Rana Ayuub is the India columnist of Washington Post. It would be natural for Biden’s VP’s niece to plug Rana Ayuub.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
independent.co.uk/news/world/asi… India threatens to jail Twitter employees for non compliance with orders to ban accounts and posts related to farmers agitation. A short thread on the hypocrisy of the reactions to this
After Twitter banned several posts&a/c in US including that of then President of US,it has no moral ground to complain when GoI threatens to act for refusing to replicate the act in India. If Twitter complains, it is essentially saying it has the sole right 2 decide who can post.
But Twitter can not claim any kind of sovereignty. It is a pvt company and subject to the laws of the land. It can contest GoI in a court in India, but that’s about it. From a principled POV, a nation state must be more powerful than a pvt company because its rulers are elected.
Can a private company conduct its business in any way it wants? Follow the net neutrality debate. Many countries have legislated that service providers can not discriminate between content providers. So, legislating not to allow discrimination between speech in same vein
If net neutrality is mandated, an Internet Service Provider (ISP) (a private company) can not enter into a deal with a content provider (another private company) to provide better quality of service to its content over others or refuse 2 carry contents of other content providers
Net neutrality is mandated in countries like US, India though some loopholes exist. But broader point, private companies are required to do business as per the law of the land. So, forcing speech neutrality by Big Tech is within Govt prerogative
Can a private company do whatever it wants in terms of denying service to any one ? The answer in general is no. It depends on the law of the land. The following case in US is illuminating oyez.org/cases/1940-195… Marsh vs Alabama
Marsh wanted to distribute religious literature in the public space of a small town owned entirely by a private company. The company refused to give her permission. US courts ruled in her favor.
Section 230 in US allows Big Tech to remove content without liability thehill.com/opinion/techno… The law proposed in Florida essentially negates that provision. Hope Florida succeeds
BJP-RSS police in Haryana shot dead 35 Dera Saccha Sauda protesters for doing far less than what was done on 26th. Police shot to kill. Modi cheered on the police. BJP-RSS politicians said they were prepared to kill 50. Not a shriek from the left.
Correction - The left actually cheered on the act and asked why police did not do more, translated, why did they not shoot more.
Why did BJP-RSS GoI not ask the police to stop the tractors using force comparable to that for Dera ? It surrendered to the narrative. Consistency can go to hell. Govt that picks and chooses for application of lethal force deserves no support
If you are comfortable with freedom of expression being stripped off, you are allied to the current seat of power - social, economic or political. You know that your views are protected. An intriguing observation next
It is documented history that Communist Govts give no freedom of expression. Here I am not referring to Communist Govts in states of India, they are no better or worse in that regard compared to other Govts. But to those in Communist nation states, eg, Russia, China etc.
Interestingly in mid 1930s in Communist backed conferences in Europe (non Russia Europe), Communists were heavily demanding FoE. They were not in power in non Russia Europe then.
My definition of left. One who fights for the economic or power underdog without any consideration of other attributes - race, religion, gender etc. No public figure in India fits the bill. A small number in US fits that criteria, a vanishingly small number.
By this definition, the left would always have to be anti Corporate.
By this definition, left would have to be staunchly freedom of expression, because that is the only tool the powerless has against the powerful.