Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.www.cnbc.com
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
and there you are, thanks for outing yourself as a hate mongerer.their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
parler was running on a cloud service that was run by companies with many clients who were uncomfortable being on the same platform with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
just like how people feel uncomfortable being in the same plane with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
parler was running on a cloud service that was run by companies with many clients who were uncomfortable being on the same platform with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
just like how people feel uncomfortable being in the same plane with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly? We understand you have battles looking in a mirror, but that isn't everyone, just you.Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
then let's hear from those cloud customers. bring it on. I bet they won't because the right wing folks buy their products.their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
parler was running on a cloud service that was run by companies with many clients who were uncomfortable being on the same platform with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
just like how people feel uncomfortable being in the same plane with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
then let's hear from those cloud customers. bring it on. I bet they won't because the right wing folks buy their products.their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
parler was running on a cloud service that was run by companies with many clients who were uncomfortable being on the same platform with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
just like how people feel uncomfortable being in the same plane with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
hahahaahahaha can't make it up.sure they do...
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
then let's hear from those cloud customers. bring it on. I bet they won't because the right wing folks buy their products.their customers were all right wing, so they made themselves uncomfortable? how's that work exactly?Parler CEO Says Parler May Be Offline Longer Than Expected -- Why Didn't We Let The Free Market Decide???
thats exactly what happened...
free market decided to kick em off because right wing lunatics are making their customers uncomfortable...
parler was running on a cloud service that was run by companies with many clients who were uncomfortable being on the same platform with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
just like how people feel uncomfortable being in the same plane with stinking right wing nut job pigs...
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
marty, it's called a monoploy, and isn't allowed in the US. see they don't like our country.Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
I make wooden toys for kids. I give them away for birthdays and Christmas. No major chain store would even consider hosting sales for my toys. Does the government have a compelling interest in making them sell my stuff?
marty, it's called a monoploy, and isn't allowed in the US. see they don't like our country.Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
guess we will see if SCOTUS is real or not.marty, it's called a monoploy, and isn't allowed in the US. see they don't like our country.Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
If all the providers deny them hosting, then it could also be a conspiracy or a racket.
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
I make wooden toys for kids. I give them away for birthdays and Christmas. No major chain store would even consider hosting sales for my toys. Does the government have a compelling interest in making them sell my stuff?
Wooden toys aren't access to political debate and information.
And you have consignment stores to sell them if you wanted to, there is an alternative to the large chains, or Ebay, or going door to door to sell them. Many other options besides the large stores.
When it comes to website and platform hosting, does Parler have alternatives?
Parler CEO says app will be offline 'longer than expected' because of Amazon, Apple and Google
Parler, a social media app popular with conservatives and supporters of President Donald Trump, has gone offline.
"Parler has gone offline after Amazon withdrew its support in the wake of the deadly U.S. Capitol riot last week. The app was reliant on cloud computing power provided by Amazon Web Services. John Matze, the founder and CEO, said in a statement on Monday that the Parler app will be down “longer than expected” because other cloud hosting companies do not want to work with Parler in light of the press statements issued by Amazon, Google and Apple."
What these big tech companies are doing is outrageous -- it is flat out socialism communism fascism Orwellian government censorship.....Why didn't the radical leftist Democrats who control big Tech just allow the free markets to decide -- instead of having people like Biden and Pelosi decide who Twitter or Facebook can or can't have on their platform - why didn't they just allow the free market to decide?? -- That is the problem when you have big government get involved with what private businesses can or can't do -- you get communism....
This shouldn't be a left or right issue (except that the right should be able to dictate what the left does or can't do) --- this should be a bipartisan issue -- we should allow free markets to have control over social media, not big government -- and the best way to do that is to nationalize Facebook and Twitter and declare them public commodities and let Trump and others he appoints decide who and who can't have access -- we should also break up Google and Amazon because these corporations have been too successful at gaining a near monopoly -- and breaking up monopolies is totally a function of a free market....In fact, we wouldn't have all of these large media, pharma and agricultural corporate conglomerates if we just allowed free markets to decide...Just think how much better something like healthcare would be if we just nationalized it and declared it a public commodity like the free market demands...
Translation:
“We told you so, we degenerate beggars have been telling you for years; let Father Government take the reigns and decide for us.”
You understand that each of those companies made their own decisions, don't you?
So you are ok with every single hosting company denying them the ability to have a website?
Sounds kinda like not wanting to bake a cake to me. How is this different?
Because if all the bakers in an area decided to not provide the cakes, then it would be an issue, and I would have an issue with it, just as I would have an issue if they denied over the counter point of sale products.
In this case you have a far more limited service, controlled by a few companies. If most of them deny these people access, they are denying them the ability to enter what has become a form of the commons where political ideas are broadcast and debated.
Got it. You only believe in the principal of a business making it's own decisions when it favors religious nuts. We already knew that. Nothing is stopping some crazy right wing hosting site from scooping up that business. Perhaps Stormfront.
No, I believe in free exercise absent a compelling government interest. If the bakers all ganged up and denied a wedding cake to a gay couple, the government has an interest. If the baker denied a non specific, point of sale item to a gay person, to me the government has an interest. In the one specific case of a contracted service like a wedding cake, that celebrates an event the baker in question finds sinful, free exercise wins out over the government's interest in commerce.
In the case of Parler, if they can't find a host due to all the hosts deciding not to work with them, then the government has a compelling interest in stopping it due to the limiting of their right to expression.
I make wooden toys for kids. I give them away for birthdays and Christmas. No major chain store would even consider hosting sales for my toys. Does the government have a compelling interest in making them sell my stuff?
Wooden toys aren't access to political debate and information.
And you have consignment stores to sell them if you wanted to, there is an alternative to the large chains, or Ebay, or going door to door to sell them. Many other options besides the large stores.
When it comes to website and platform hosting, does Parler have alternatives?
Fox.
