> Why would non state actors be any less scary?

Non-state actors can't easily use violence to throw me in jail.

Larrikin 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

TikTok is blocking upload of ICE videos and Facebook is blocking posts with information about the ICE agents. Amazon just paid millions of dollars to put out a movie nobody wants about Donalds wife. Every major tech company paid millions of dollars for Donalds library at the beginning of all this for "the library"

The surveillance non state actors are already doing anything this administration wants.

▲

pc86 2 hours ago | parent [-]

This isn't a counterpoint. The philosophical reason the state doing something is worse than a private company doing the exact same thing is that the state can imprison, bankrupt, and execute you. TikTok can't.

The argument isn't that it's good these companies are doing this - it's not. The argument is that it would be even worse if the state was doing it directly. There are more avenues to stop, nullify, and avoid this when it's a private enterprise than when it's the state.

	▲	Larrikin an hour ago \| parent [-]
		You're arguing a point that may have been relevant in Donald's first term. All of the companies mentioned are positioning themselves to be state sanctioned in a way that makes them effectively parts of the government. If we don't get a "third" term then your argument becomes relevant again and I agree.

▲

mmcwilliams 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You're under the belief that private actors can't influence state actors to use violence on their behalf, completely isolating them from responsibility? If a private business calls the police on a suspected trespasser and the police shoot that person, is the business held liable? Ever? Seems like they have the better end of the bargain than the state.

	▲	cucumber3732842 an hour ago \| parent [-]
		>and the police shoot that person, is the business held liable? Ever? Seems like they have the better end of the bargain than the state. Are you insane? When if ever are the agents of the state held responsible. If anything the civil suit against the business is more likely to go somewhere. The fact that the state may "pay out" does not mean it has any serious incentive not to shoot the person dead so long as such payouts don't become too regular. I owe Comcast $200, according to them. I've "owed" it for years. Can you imagine if I owed any government agency the same sum for the same time. I'd be arrested and thrown in jail for non-payment and/or some sort of quasi-contempt charge if I refused.

▲

sgarland 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

They seem to be able to induce whistleblowers to off themselves at a shocking rate, though.

▲

kace91 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

>Non-state actors can't easily use violence to throw me in jail.

Let me rephrase: why wouldn’t state actors be scary?

The state might have a monopoly on legal physical violence, but I think it is naive to think private interests can’t harm you just as much, with or without state connections. See my previous examples.

▲

andruby 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Blackwater, Wagner, Aegis, Triple Canopy, DynCorp, etc enter chat..

	▲	pc86 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I wasn't aware Blackwater operates jails.