Is Facebook private or public? This is currently being hotly debated, even in libertarian circles where Facebook was by and large considered private up until it silenced a large number of libertarian-leaning groups and pages. I believe that in order to debate this topic, the definitions of public and private must first be established.
What distinguishes a private entity from a public one? I would argue that the characteristic that most distinguishes a private entity from a public one is whether or not you’re allowed to stop participating in it. If, for example, you stop participating in the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), you will likely be awakened some early morning by the sound of men with guns breaking down your door. If you’re lucky, they’ll kidnap you. If you’re unlucky, they’ll summarily execute you.
What happens if you stop participating in Facebook? You stop participating in Facebook. That’s it. No men with guns will kick down your door and kidnap or execute you.
Since participation in Facebook is voluntary, I will continue to argue that it is a private entity. Even if it does collect user information for the expressed purpose of selling it to government agencies (as many self-proclaimed libertarians have been arguing as of late), it’s still private because you’re not being cohered into participating in the information collection (until the IRS’s information collection).
When referring to communicable diseases, it’s common to say that they’re spreading.
Considering that, I think the phrase “spreading democracy” is particularly apt.
My wedding is this weekend so my time is focused on that. Regular updates will resume beginning next week.
Today is 9/11.
Although all of us who experience 9/11 swore we would never forget, many of us have.
So let us all take a solemn moment to remember what happened on September 11, 2001. Let us all remember the release of Slayer’s God Hates Us All album.
A bunch of conservatives threw a tantrum because Nike chose an individual who failed to stand during prayers to skycloth as its mascot. While a bunch of triggered snowflakes cutting up their socks and burning their shoes is mildly entertaining, this has the potential to be extremely entertaining:
Ford, (F)a sponsor of the National Football League, has voiced support for NFL players exercising their right to free speech and peaceful protest after President Donald Trump urged fans to consider a boycott.
“We respect individuals’ rights to express their views, even if they are not ones we share,” the company said on Monday. “That’s part of what makes America great.”
Queue a bunch of triggered conservatives burning their Ford F-150s.
Yeah, I know it won’t happen. Virtue signalling only goes so far. Some people may be willing to cut up a $10 pair of socks or even burn an old pair of shoes to demonstrate their virtuousness, but few are willing to destroy a vehicle worth tens of thousands of dollars to show the world how much they love the skycloth.
Nike announced its new mascot, Colin Kaepernick. Since Kaepernick made a name for himself by failing to stand during prayers to skycloth, a lot of conservatives are upset with Nike and have chosen to make Nike feel their impotent rage:
Following the announcement, the hashtags #BoycottNike and #JustBurnIt started trending on Twitter and shares started falling. Some angry consumers even posted photos and videos of themselves burning their Nike shoes and other gear to protest the company using the divisive figure in its 30th anniversary ad campaign.
I ask you this, is there a more useless way to protest a company than destroying your own property? I can’t think of one. If you purchase a pair of Nike shoes and later burned them, it doesn’t hurt Nike one bit, the company already has your money.
With that said, I am glad that Nike chose Kaepernick as its mascot, not because I feel that a backup quarterback best represents the company but because the memes that have sprung forth have been solid gold! This one is my favorite so far:
The powers of the current United States president never cease to amaze me. For example, he apparently remembers the bombing of Pearl Harbor:
“I remember Pearl Harbor,” Trump reportedly told Abe as part of a tirade against the U.S. trade deficit with Japan. The president reportedly wanted better deals to help U.S. car and beef producers.
Considering Pearl Harbor was bombed in 1941 and Trump was born in 1946, he apparently has a really good memory, just the best.
If you’re ever feeling particularly stupid, just remind yourself that somebody actually published this:
With the possible exception of the U.S. military (including veterans and families), no group was more indebted to Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) than the human rights community.
When an organization is named People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) you might make the mistaken of assuming that it is an organization that focuses on fighting animals abusers, not how fictional animals are portrayed on a bag of snacks:
(AP) — After more than a century behind bars, the beasts on boxes of animal crackers are roaming free.
Mondelez International, the parent company of Nabisco, has redesigned the packaging of its Barnum’s Animals crackers in response to pressure from People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals.
PETA, which has been protesting the use of animals in circuses for more than 30 years, wrote a letter to Mondelez in the spring of 2016 calling for a redesign.
Far be it for me to tell others what battle are or aren’t important but the fictional conditions of fictional animals that represent what you’re about to bite the head off of (because all normal people start by biting the head off of animal crackers) seems pretty insignificant to me.
One of the “wonders” of the modern United States is that you can just say any old shit and get away with it:
Bonafide patriot woman and “Fox & Friends” middle-seat host Ainsley Earhardt made an oopsie during a Thursday morning rallying cry for America when she made reference to the never-existent “communist Japan.”
“You know, we defeated communist Japan, radical Islamists. We ask our men and women to go overseas to fight for our country and sacrifice so much for our country so we can be the land of the free, the land of the brave,” the host said.
This is an example of a very prevalent phenomenon here in the United States, and from what I’ve seen the rest of the world, where people feel free to talk authoritatively about shit they know nothing about.
I’m currently reading a book on the history of Japan from the Meiji Restoration to modern times. I just got to the beginning of World War II. Although I was vaguely familiar with this aspect of Japanese history, after reading the chapters dealing with the 1920s through the 1930s I now understand just how anti-communist the Japanese government was at that time (and that attitude didn’t stop in the 1940s). This doesn’t surprise me since the Japanese government at the time was strongly focused on the emperor and communists hate emperors (the name specifically, they prefer the term chairman or premier).
Now that I’ve read that part of the book and have familiarity with the topic, I won’t shy away from talking about it. However, before that I would have shied away from talking about the Japanese government at that time because I wasn’t very familiar with it and I try to avoid talking authoritatively about things that I’m not familiar with. I also feel that I’m in the minority when it comes to that.