This question is almost too ridiculous to dignify with an answer, but how about we start with the patent protection eBay enjoys for online auctions? How about the monopoly on state violence that works to keep pitchfork wielding mobs at bay? How about the government-prompted PayPal blockade that reduces competition from Wikileaks? Your arrogance is way out of line with the quality of your commentary.
You seem to think that because you successfully bait others who respond to you heatedly means you are brilliant. To wit: can you bother dealing with facts, as in timelines? Ebay went public in Ebay filed for its patent in October Ebay went public Sept.
And the patent was not approved till Please tell me how much value Omidyar has derived from patent suits since then. This question is mind boggling. The PayPal financial blockade on Wikileaks is a perfect example of this. PayPal complied, and the state left them alone for being obedient. How can you not understand that? The answers to your question seem self-evident. Your response proves my point. All you libertarians paint with broad brushes and fail when forced to deal with facts.
Omidyar made his fortune through Ebay. Moreover, now that Ebay is public, Omidyar is not involved in management, nor does he have veto rights.
Is Ethical Marketing an Oxymoron?
Banks, Visa, and Mastercard as well as Paypal were told to stop remitting payments to Wikileaks. Paypal is particularly vulnerable because it is basically an unlicensed bank. How they get away with that is beyond me. It would be trivial for the Feds to come down on Paypal like a ton of bricks if it kept remitting payments to Wikileaks when everyone else had come to heel. This was my first comment on this website, and apparently that was enough for you to label me as a libertarian.
And in the same sentence, you accuse me of painting with a broad brush? This is beyond obvious.
The Atlantic Crossword
The best you can do is that he claims to have opposed it — and this is important? How pathetic. He was chair of Ebay at this time, in a position of power and influence over the decision. And when given the chance, when it really mattered, all he could muster was a column in a little-read Hawaii newspaper.
In other words, he played ball. That you find this limp gesture to be of utmost importance, and that you see it as anything other than compliance with a microscopic sprinkle of objection, is indescribably dumb. Lastly, as the financial blockade continues i. She posted some comments about the PayPal blockade of WikiLeaks. Omidyar could have raised hell, if ending the blockade was important to him.
What is more important — the existence of PayPal or the existence of WikiLeaks? Standing up for principles is extraordinarily unprofitable in a capitalist system and, as you pointed out, can lead to the extinction of your business. Or are you a mind reader and thus have better insight? And do you know anything about the role of a chairman? I doubt this matter came up for a board vote.
Once again, this should be obvious. At the very least, a person of his stature could have had his objections published in a newspaper with a larger readership. Your statement about compliance with government orders being normal business proves my initial point — that successful people and businesses must play ball with the state. So of course compliance with state orders is a normal business matter. Elizabeth Warren too? I have yet to see anyone make that case. Have you never heard of network effects?
Ebay was an effective early mover in an field with extremely strong network effects. That seems more than sufficient as a reason for his success. Surely you deserve just compensation for your troubles. Yeesh, Tarzie, easy on the persecution complex. Showing up to lament your name is such mud when no one was talking about you is a bit much. Because of his strenuously held ideology, I do not expect his venture to cover, say, organizing efforts of WalMart workers, exposes of charter schools, coverage of crime and corruption of big banks, and so on.
- McGuire on Media - Page 7 of 19 -McGuire on Media!
- Recent Items.
- Quotas, the Candy Wall, & Graduation!
- The Evangelicals: A Historical, Thematic, and Biographical Guide: A Historical, Thematic and Biographical Guide?
That is a huge caveat to me. I think many people who have sung its praises so far might be in for an unpleasant surprise. You really should try to put as much thought into your comments. Omidyar does not trust the government. That seems to be beside the point. Imagine if you expressed concern that the head of a crime family was undermining trust in another criminal syndicate. Property rights underlie and enable everything. Indeed, property rights underlie and enable everything Omidyar wants to hear—but distract and divert from what the targets of those programs might actually need or be asking for.
I, on the other hand, think it matters a great deal what he does with his money, and how he uses it to promote his beliefs. I think this is the rhetorical Achilles heel for libertarians — they are extremely reluctant to frankly address the impact of their ideology in the real world.
- liacalryranut.gq - مستندات Google.
- Heeding the Call, Finding the Path: Selected Sermons, 2005-2007.
- Like the Dead in Their Coffins: Torture, Detention, and the Crushing of Dissent in Iran.
- The Cambridge Introduction to Emily Dickinson (Cambridge Introductions to Literature)?
- H.B. Koplowitz (Author of Carbondale After Dark)?
- Gerard T. Rubble: Hes Nothing but Trouble!: Bullies Are People Too... a Holiday Story;
They would rather, as JTFaraday does above, engage in endless and futile word games or turn the focus back to complicit government officals. The DeSoto reform was an expansion of the plutocratic government, which Omidyar favored and helped pay for. Here we have an expansion of an already plutocratic government at the behest of Omidyar and neoliberal finance entrpreneurs like himself. I do not see the conflict inherent in someone like DeSoto as being between corporate power and state power.
It is a conflict over the ends to which state power is put. My larger point in regard to the Greenwald partnership is that toxic inequality is always bad thing, and I am not inclined toward the popular good oligarch vs. It used to be that when you offered dissenting views on liberal sites you were accused of being a Republican. Now you get accused of being a libertarian. Please entertain the possibility that there are people who find concentrated power and authority worthy of scrutiny and criticism in both the private and public sector, and who reject the idea that corporate power and state power are ever truly separate.
We might be talking about the same thing in different ways. What you call a strong state I call a compliant or forbearing one.
Subscribe to Blog via Email
Rentiers want officials to fix the law to their desires, then step away. The state might provide the enforcement muscle down the line when everything goes to hell, but in the intervening period — when the damage is being done — the state is absent. I think the attack on the legitimacy of the state is clearest in the privatized education efforts. The subtext of it is: Public education cannot be effectively done or as effectively done as for-profit private education can , so the state is not a legitimate provider of that good.
You seem to see these dynamics as playing out in terms of raw power and coercion. In that formulation, libertarians need a strong state. I think, thaough, that the only way for states to be stable over the long haul is with the assent of citizens. Neoliberal economics requires a weak in that sense government, and I believe Omidyar et. Good God. How many times do you need to mischaracterize a person pursuant to extolling the peerlessness of your own concern? We get it. You understand what matters.
Your understanding of state power? There is an argument to be made that spacing out the NSA stories keeps the issue in front of the public for a greater length of time. It allows the authors to whom Snowden entrusted this material greater control of the narrative.
Is Ethical Marketing an Oxymoron in Today's Business World?
And it allows for public pressure to build. Greenwald severing his ties to the Guardian and starting this new venture has derailed this process. He was the go to guy on the NSA mass spying programs. Stories have appeared in other outlets like the Washington Post, but we now no longer know where or when we will hear from Greenwald again.
And with all the failures of Obamacare, the NSA story and the pressures it was creating are dissipating. Snowden appears to have been fairly careful in what he copied. If no further major revelations are in the offing, then the argument for keeping this information out of the public domain goes away.