The argument that government has no responsibility to protect the free speech rights of citizens (MUH PRIVATE COMPANIES) is curious given that Big Gov spends trillions and uses huge amounts of coercive force to protect all sorts of ersatz "rights" invented by socialists.
We're told people have a "right" to health insurance, so government had to seize control of the entire industry, spending trillions to destroy the free marketplace, provide lavish subsidies for favored policies and groups, and outlaw insurance that didn't meet its standards.
We're not far removed from a vicious argument about the "right" to contraceptives, which was based ENTIRELY on the assertion that asking people to pay even a pittance for those goods was equivalent to denying them "access" to sacred contraception.
We're currently being told that people have a "right" to higher education, which must be given to them with compulsive force by "forgiving" student loan debt - which was, in turn, inflated beyond reason by government interference.
Modern government is constantly inventing new "rights" and using coercion and confiscatory taxation to "protect" or "provide" them. But talk about free speech and suddenly the State must not touch a hair on the heads of those precious Big Tech oligarchs?
Why, it's enough to make you think the actual rights enumerated in the Constitution and its amendments are less important, less worthy of protection, than the phony "rights" concocted by greedy socialists. As if the logical rights codified in law were merely wispy ideas.
If the arguments deployed in favor of tech oligarchies and cancel culture were taken seriously and applied universally, half of D.C. would become a ghost town by the end of the week, and the federal budget might actually balance. But of course they won't be. /end
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
