The big internet media companies have made some headlines, at least on the internet, with their censorship of certain content. Google has been accused of favoring certain sites in its search engine to promote its leftist political agenda, while pushing other sites down the ranking list that go against the agenda of the people running the show.
Social media sites, particularly Facebook, have also gained much attention in banning certain content that is best described as anti-establishment. It isn’t just conservative and libertarian content being banned, as there is some leftist content that also goes against the establishment line.
As with almost everything, the government has its hand in the jar. Congress will pull the CEO of Facebook to be grilled, but they don’t seem to give the same treatment to the intelligence agencies that are supposed to be under its domain. Let’s remember that Congress is responsible (or is supposed to be responsible) for funding all government spending.
We also don’t know just how much the government is pressuring these social media companies to censor content. There are several recent articles, such as this one, that describe how the government is involved in banning this content.
Unfortunately, many conservatives – and even worse, some libertarians – are calling for the government to stop this social media censorship on grounds of free speech. They justify it because they say these are not really private companies.
But is this really the solution? First of all, why would people who criticize the government then expect the government to go in and solve the problem? This is the dictator syndrome, where people say what the solution should be (with more government control), and they expect the law to pass just as they describe it.
The whole nature of government is gaining power, corruption, lobbying, cronyism, and backdoor deals. Why would this be any different in this scenario? We can demand that the government go in and stop Facebook from censoring certain content, but then that gives full reign to the government to control everything dealing with social media, including other companies. And why wouldn’t the same people in government who are encouraging Facebook and others to censor content continue to rig the game when they are given even more power?
As a side note, it is interesting that these social media companies supposedly censor content for promoting violence. If that were true, it should only be the libertarian content that is allowed. Unless you are just stating pure facts – such as, “Donald Trump signed legislation today” – then virtually every political post is advocating violence because that is what government is. Virtually all government involves the initiation of violence. This is what differentiates it from most of the rest of society.
Cut Budgets
It is not that conservatives and libertarians should not be critical of what is going on. It’s just that the solution is not more government. The solution is less government.
This is an opportunity, especially for libertarians, to criticize what is going on and to call for massive budget cuts. It is wrong that any government-funded company is teaming up with Facebook. It is wrong for people in Congress to threaten, intimidate, or even question the CEO of Facebook or anyone else in private business.
Libertarians should propose defunding any organization that is receiving government funds and in any way involved in “helping” social media companies or controlling them in any way.
Some will say that Facebook, Google, Twitter, and other companies are like monopolies. But just because they happen to dominate their markets now, it doesn’t mean that will always be the case. There are competitors, and if the censorship gets bad enough, they will lose business. It can happen a lot more quickly than one expects.
We need these choices though. We need for the government to stop interfering with what these companies do. It is economic fascism. We need a free market. If the head people at Facebook still want to delete content just because it goes against their political beliefs, then that is their choice. It is also the choice of the shareholders on whether they want to throw out the Board of Directors and get people in there who prefer profits over politics.
Again, we don’t know how much of this is based on coercion and how much of this would happen in a truly free market.
There will always be decisions made by individuals and individuals running businesses that we don’t agree with. But it is their business. You can criticize it, and you can choose not to do business with it, assuming a relatively free market.
I may not like the way my local grocery store stocks its shelves. When they advertise good sale prices, I wish they would order more inventory so it doesn’t run out. There are many places I criticize for certain things, yet I still do business with them. There are others that went too far in not pleasing me, so I don’t do business with them.
As libertarians, we must favor property rights, which includes the property rights of business owners and the managers they hire. If the government is involved in controlling that business, we should demand that government power be removed. We certainly shouldn’t advocate for even more government control.
The way to remove government power is to cut budgets. Unfortunately, we are not hearing much noise for budget cuts or the defunding of entire agencies.