Sports
See other Sports Articles
Title: Does Corporate America Really Want to Hold a National Referendum on Whether Americans Value Their Own Freedoms or Corporate Freedom to Import Chinese Censorship More?
Source:
AceOfSpades
URL Source: http://ace.mu.nu/archives/383697.php
Published: Oct 10, 2019
Author: Ace
Post Date: 2019-10-10 18:04:28 by Tooconservative
Keywords: None
Views: 190
Jay Cost writes on Twitter (sarcastically): Americans also love to be lectured about the minutest of their personal, social, and political preferences while foreign oppressors get a total pass. You are not waking the bear. This will be fine. Don't think twice about the populist movements that have roiled American politics over the last decade. I'm sure they will never turn their attention to the various coastal billionaires profiting off the oppressive CCP regime. A+ work, crew. A+. Sarcasm aside, the Houston Rockets should be more scared of the good people of Houston than the CCP. — Jay Cost (@JayCostTWS) October 9, 2019 They sold us on nearly completely free trade -- free in the sense that China could do whatever they wanted, so long as they paid off their counterparts in the US enough (and those counterparts, in turn, stuffed enough money in the pockets of owned-and-operated politicians and think-tanks to argue this was all to the good) -- on the theory that we would "export our values" to China. Instead, we've imported Chinese authoritarianism. And Cato, AEI, etc., keep telling us "this is how you get more freedom." Because they're being paid to say that. And because they don't mind sacrificing a little freedom for a little short-term profit in the China trade. We've exported our manufacturing jobs to China, and imported China's Social Credit authoritarianism in return. And some continue claiming this is a great deal and we should have even more of it. It's not that I disagree with punishing them -- I just want to know why "principle" now demands we punish a corporation for exercising its own "rights," whereas before, it was icky and nasty and mean and totally not-principled to punish the NBA for bullying the voters of an entire US state. Can the people who flip back and forth on these issues depending only, it seems, upon whether their liberal twitter friends are demanding some punishment please explain what "principle" is guiding them in these case-by-case decisions? I see Phil Klein and AllahPundit and BaseballCuck and David French and the rest of the Drag Queen Story Hour gang are all now fighting mad about the NBA imposing Chinese censorship on the US. Okay, well: Why didn't you fuckers say a damn thing when the NBA imposed #Woke cultural Marxism on a state? Why was the NBA right and good to do that, but now they've erred so badly they must be #Cancelled? Big media corporations -- including your precious social media monopolies -- have been imposing alien values of censorship, a nascent Social Credit system, for years now, and you have taken the opportunity in each new case of #Woke Corporate Censorship to argue for the unquestionable superiority of corporate speech rights over citizen speech rights. Each time, you have championed corporate rights and demeaned those arguing for individual rights. Each time, you have sided with the corporate oligarchs against the dreaded "populists." Now your liberal twitter pals are also upset by a corporation's imposition of censorship, and only now do you speak up and say that this is contrary to American values. If there is any "principle" animating your flip-flopping on these issues besides the one of "not wanting to look icky to my Twitter palz," please do announce it at some point. Because we'd all love to hear your deep thinking on this. Does the NBA's action here -- and the action of ABC and ESPN and Nike in enabling/covering up Chinese censorship -- represent a watershed change in your thinking, or is this merely a one-off deviation from your usual insistence on the Doctrine of Corporate Infallibility? Or are you only on the right side in this particular case because your liberal pals have permitted you to take this position here? Because, for the instant facts only and none other, this position is now popular with the Twitter Friends Club?
(1 image) Corporate America going soft on the Chinese is definitely a smart move. There is nothing that warms the cockles of the American heart more than insanely wealthy c-suites coddling a country that spits on the Bill of Rights. This is a path to bipartisan popularity for Wall Street. This anecdote from Josh Rogin is INSANE. Does corporate America really know what they are doing? pic.twitter.com/8fOmPCtYpi 
— Jay Cost (@JayCostTWS) October 9, 2019 Also worth mentioning that @washingtonpost makes money off publishing Chinese communist propaganda, @Heminator explained in some detail here - https://t.co/9IU6JZYgcy https://t.co/0H2y9I677y— John Daniel Davidson (@johnddavidson) October 9, 2019 these are the signs that led to two fans being kicked out of Tuesday’s 76ers vs. Guangzhou Loong Lions game *in Philadelphia* pic.twitter.com/xzQxhNyqIy— David Paulk 波大卫 (@davidpaulk) October 9, 2019 We are currently standing tall behind the basket with our Free Hong Kong shirts on. We were told if we do another sign we will be removed. Standing tall in our tshirts— Jon Schweppe (@JonSchweppe) October 9, 2019 Our “Google Uyghurs” sign has been confiscated. pic.twitter.com/fX4tF4oOxR— Jon Schweppe (@JonSchweppe) October 9, 2019 ARE YOU FRIGGING KIDDING MEhttps://t.co/g7BWVW8i3K pic.twitter.com/nGpoVidpqX— Noah Smith 🐇 (@Noahpinion) October 9, 2019
By the way: Just curious, but will the pro-corporate libertarian fake-conservatives who told us we should not punish the NBA for coercing a state to not pass a law forbidding #Woke local governments to mandate transgender/any-sex bathrooms please explain why it's now required to punish the NBA?
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]