Monday, August 28, 2006

Commercial Decisions Aren't Censorship...

...but try telling that to the deniers. Johnnie 'I'm not Hannover' Hargis just threw his rattle out of the pram after receiving an email from Michael Santomauro, acting business manager of VHO while the boss is in jail, saying that US firm PayPal has suspended VHO's account on the grounds that it violates their acceptable use policy on two counts.

Firstly, because "PayPal may not be used to send or receive payments for items or in support of organizations that promote hate, violence, or racial intolerance." Secondly, and this one makes you wonder why it wasn't enforced sooner, because "PayPal also prohibits a person convicted of a violent felony, or his relatives or associates, from using PayPal to benefit financially from the convicted criminal's notoriety or crime.". Now, if you want to split hairs, Young Germar is not a violent felon, merely a deluded pseudo-scientist, but there's little doubt that VHO is soliciting donations on behalf of Rudolf and precisely because of his notoriety.

The response from Hargis is predictably hilarious and utterly paranoid. The ninny automatically assumes that the 'judeo-supremacists' must have been behind it, which would be news to 'avowed libertarian' Peter Thiel, co-founder of PayPal, or to the founder of eBay, Iranian emigre Pierre Omidyar, methinks.

In any case, as the title of this post alludes to, both Hannover and Santomauro don't have a legal leg to stand on. The First Amendment applies exclusively to the US goverment, not to private corporations, who have the legal right to enforce any restrictions they so desire. It's the e-commerce equivalent of the shopkeeper saying 'we don't want your business here'.

Holocaust deniers have been largely shut out of the bookstore trade by simple economics - their books evidently don't sell well enough to warrant much interest from Borders or Barnes & Noble - but remain tolerated on amazon.com, since online bookstores can cope with niche interests better than physical ones. PayPal's decision, however, cuts to the very heart of an operation such as VHO.

How long before they try the hypocritical tactic of comparing the ban to certain boycotts in the past? Not long, probably. Expect to see some smart-ass mouthing off shortly about 'Revisionisten unerwünscht', oblivious to the irony.

9 comments:

Scott Smith said...

I think it is censorship!

The idiots at eBay and Paypal will not allow certain materials, like model airplanes with swastikas on the tailplanes, busts of Hitler, historical photographs with a swastika visible, and so on.

But Che and Stalin memorabilia are okay it seems.

Ordering Germar Rudolf's books is not allowed because he has been convicted of a "violent felony." I wasn't aware that publishing a forensic technical report was a "violent" felony, although it is Thoughtcrime where he hails from.

Personally I won't do business with eBay and I only use Paypal as a last resort.

I'm not going to tolerate big-brotherism anywhere that I find it, and I don't care if they claim it is for "commercial reasons" or not. It is still censorship.

One could cite "commercial reasons" for making Negroes sit at their own lunchcounters or at the back of the bus too. That's not an argument.

Nick Terry said...

No, Scott, it's not censorship. Censorship is something done by the state. Racial discrimination has been legislated against by the state, so your histrionic comparison with civil rights is false. The same would apply generally to sexual discrimination.

Private citizens, which means businesses as much as workers, have every right to refuse to buy political wares, or to refuse to do business with people they don't like. That cuts both ways. You can boycott eBay because they dislike your fascist leanings and won't sell crap with swastikas on it, but they are within their rights to boycott neo-Nazis just as much as you are. The same would apply to a company that wanted to discriminate against liberals.

That's why St Martin's pulling out of publishing David Irving's Goebbels biography was not censorship, whatever Irving or you might say. No one has the right to equal access to commercial media whatsoever. There is no quota or guarantee for 'all view points'.

Kooks, conspiracy theorists, far-left revolutiuonaries, Nutzis and so forth are however perfectly withion their rights in the US to set up their own publishing companies, websites and so forth, and that's protected by law. But they don't have a 'right' to access to distribution networks any more than the most obscure hobbyist obsessives do who might want to sell a book full of train numbers.

Being shut out of bookstores is a fairly universal experience for minority interests. But it's easy enough to order whacko books through mail-order, via amazon etc.

By the way, PayPal also prohibits the use of its services for purchasing porn.

Santomauro should explore whether other credit card transaction companies will do business with him. Those people are happy to do business with pornographers. The costs might work out marginally higher, but them be the breaks if one is dealing with a 'niche' interest.

It's just business, Scott, so don't take it so darn personal ;-)

Scott Smith said...

I don't think censorship has to be conducted by the State to still be censorship.

If I use my millions to smear somebody or hire somebody to "shut them down," or to break their kneecaps until they shut up, that is little different than censorship conducted by the State.

By not doing business with eBay I'm not coercing them in any way, and even if I call for a boycott--although that would generate some leverage. Political, social and economic leverage is not the same as coercion and intimidation.

I just checked and one finds all kinds of Stalin and Che memorabilia, as I said, including Stalin busts for sale on eBay. But a Hitler bust is banned.

Why would that be if not for "the Lobby"? Well, they have too much power. If they can coerce silly things, then they can coerce on more weighty and important matters.

:-(

Sergey Romanov said...

"I don't think censorship has to be conducted by the State to still be censorship."

Then it simply means that sometimes censorship is acceptable. It's that simple.

Nick Terry said...

What makes you think it's 'the Lobby' (why don't you just say, 'the Jews', Scott?) that acts to pressure private companies like eBay to make these prohibitions?

In fact, please do continue pissing on the graves of the 200,000 Americans who died defeating Nazi Germany. It shows you up for the idiot you are.

Anonymous said...

"What makes you think it's 'the Lobby' (why don't you just say, 'the Jews', Scott?)"

For the same reason he uses the term "darkie" instead of "nigger", because he doesn't want to "offend" anybody (according to a posting of his in a thread on RODOH).
A Nazi, racist and a coward. Nice combo, Scotty!

Aoris

Scott Smith said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Scott Smith said...

Nick said:

<< What makes you think it's 'the Lobby' (why don't you just say, 'the Jews', Scott?) that acts to pressure private companies like eBay to make these prohibitions? >>

Because not all Jews are Israel-Firsters, even if not religious. Some "dual loyalists" are Evangelical Christians, in fact.

I disagree with Walt & Mearsheimer's analysis of The Lobby in one respect, however. They don't think The Lobby is treasonable and I do.

But not all to the same degree, of course. For example, the local newspaper ran a story during the recent Lebanon war. It seems some Jewish youth from Arizona was going to Israel to join the Israeli Army so he could practice state terrorism by killing dark-skinned Gentiles. He even sported a sidearm in the picture--not an unusual occurrence in Arizona, but if we were talking about a White American defending his ethnicity and borders wearing a sidearm, he might as well be portrayed as donning a Klan robe too. As an ex-Mormon who understands a little bit about how non-Gentiles view the world, I was recently told that I was wrong for noticing how Jews aspire for study in Israel living in a commune or guarding Zionist occupational borders--or in this case volunteering to kill Gentiles under the aegis of a foreign flag. But Minuteman types who guard the porous Southern border with Mexico armed only with flashlights, spare water, and a cellphone are just Confederate haters.

<< In fact, please do continue pissing on the graves of the 200,000 Americans who died defeating Nazi Germany. It shows you up for the idiot you are. >>

I don't think that is the correct figure since most of the combat was in the Pacific. In any case, it is not the fault of the Greatest Generation that their government was as wrong as ours is today with the same messianic Interventionism.

Aoris said:

<< Nick: "What makes you think it's 'the Lobby' (why don't you just say, 'the Jews', Scott?)"

<< For the same reason he uses the term "darkie" instead of "nigger", because he doesn't want to "offend" anybody (according to a posting of his in a thread on RODOH).
A Nazi, racist and a coward. Nice combo, Scotty! >>

I didn't realize that "Jew" was a swear word.

I don't really care much for darkies, yes, but I don't have anything against anybody if they leave me alone. And I have never advocated denying the civil rights of anyone. I also try not to use the term "Nigger" in polite company, if at all. I'm not sure where the "coward" part comes from since I try to be upfront with all my prejudices. I promised that I would not use the term "raghead," for example.

:-)

arabisraelites said...

The false Jews have no connection to the Israelites but they are a cult of hated Europeans. Date Line NBC, the skeletons they hide in their closets. http://www.arabisraelites.com/f3000.htm

No one who followed the laws of Moses.. no one who had any physical ties to the Israelites nothing but european cult members were killed by their own relatives ... over 60 million people killed and every thing was about the poor little jews.. what idiots