Amazon 451

[Beetow]

Specialty book stores typically carry merchandise that caters to particular interests.
For example: Christian book stores carry products for Christians, Magic book stores
carry products for magicians, Nautical book stores carry products for boaters,
Motoring book stores carry products for bikers, car lovers, mechanics, and flyers,
Mystery book stores carry products for Murder She Wrote type of readers, Occult
book stores carry products for folk into astrology and whatnot, and Head Shops
carry products for folks with carnal appetites.

You see, nobody expects specialty book stores to accommodate every possible
interest; in point of fact, that would be a very unreasonable expectation.

Thus far; Amazon hasn't been a specialty vendor. But now, instead of
indiscriminately stocking books, it has begun culling its wares, viz: it has begun to
limit its inventory to books that don't challenge Mr. Jeff Bezos' personal ideology. In
other words; Bezos is circling the wagons and beginning to structure Amazon's
business model to defend the interests of his political allies.

Normally a betrayal of the public's trust would be commercial suicide; but seeing as
how Bezos' wealth already exceeds that of king Midas, then he can easily absorb
the loss of revenue he is sure to incur due to stifled sales.
_

 

[Cactus Kitten]

Specialty book stores typically carry merchandise that caters to particular interests.
For example: Christian book stores carry products for Christians, Magic book stores
carry products for magicians, Nautical book stores carry products for boaters,
Motoring book stores carry products for bikers, car lovers, mechanics, and flyers,
Mystery book stores carry products for Murder She Wrote type of readers, Occult
book stores carry products for folk into astrology and whatnot, and Head Shops
carry products for folks with carnal appetites.

You see, nobody expects specialty book stores to accommodate every possible
interest; in point of fact, that would be a very unreasonable expectation.

Thus far; Amazon hasn't been a specialty vendor. But now, instead of
indiscriminately stocking books, it has begun culling its wares, viz: it has begun to
limit its inventory to books that don't challenge Mr. Jeff Bezos' personal ideology. In
other words; Bezos is circling the wagons and beginning to structure Amazon's
business model to defend the interests of his political allies.

Normally a betrayal of the public's trust would be commercial suicide; but seeing as
how Bezos' wealth already exceeds that of king Midas, then he can easily absorb
the loss of revenue he is sure to incur due to stifled sales.
_

And, he can take those losses off taxes.

 

[Beetow]

While active on another Christian forum some years ago, one of my posts pointed
out that the Bible teaches that gays and lesbians are in just as much danger of
ending up in Hell as murderers. Well; one of the moderators deleted my comment
as "hate speech".

NOTE: The United States does not have codified hate speech laws; since the U.S.
Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that laws criminalizing hate speech violate the
guarantee to freedom of speech contained in the First Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.

To my knowledge, and in my experience, neither the US Supreme Court nor the US
Constitution have jurisdiction in cyberspace; which is quite likely why human rights
abuses are common on the internet.
_

 

[Shutterbug]

Regarding one's deportment and conduct toward others, the Master said it best: treat others as you would have them treat you. Pretty simple advice.

 

[Cactus Kitten]

While active on another Christian forum some years ago, one of my posts pointed
out that the Bible teaches that gays and lesbians are in just as much danger of
ending up in Hell as murderers. Well; one of the moderators deleted my comment
as "hate speech".

NOTE: The United States does not have codified hate speech laws; since the U.S.
Supreme Court has repeatedly ruled that laws criminalizing hate speech violate the
guarantee to freedom of speech contained in the First Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution.

To my knowledge, and in my experience, neither the US Supreme Court nor the US
Constitution have jurisdiction in cyberspace; which is quite likely why human rights
abuses are common on the internet.
_

Principles of Jurisdiction on the Internet

 

[Beetow]

It is nigh unto impossible for users of social platforms to comply with a rule that
forbids "inappropriate and/or offensive" content because opinions about what
constitutes that kind of content varies from person to person, and culture to
culture.

It would be very helpful if platform managers would precisely define and/or
describe inappropriate and/or offensive content so people don't have to guess at it.

Precise definitions and descriptions would help to curb abuses too because without
them, platform managers can ban just about anything they want by arbitrarily
deeming it inappropriate and/or offensive; not only comments and discussions
related to the 2020 election; but even Betty Crocker cake recipes.
_

 

[Shutterbug]

It is nigh unto impossible for users of social platforms to comply with a rule that
forbids "inappropriate and/or offensive" content because opinions about what
constitutes that kind of content varies from person to person, and culture to
culture.

It would be very helpful if platform managers would precisely define and/or
describe inappropriate and/or offensive content so people don't have to guess at it.

Precise definitions and descriptions would help to curb abuses too because without
them, platform managers can ban just about anything they want by arbitrarily
deeming it inappropriate and/or offensive; not only comments and discussions
related to the 2020 election; but even Betty Crocker cake recipes.
_

Good behaviour doesn't require a degree in Freudian psychology. What fosters many heated arguments is pride: I am right and you must agree. Eventually the exchange progresses from agree to disagree to hurt feelings and a desire to even the score. That, and the illusion of safety behind several miles of wires.

 

[Beetow]

This comment based upon *spark notes related to Ray Bradbury's novel: Fahrenheit
451

In explaining how books came to be banned in the first place, the main character's
supervisor explains:

"Special interest groups and other "minorities" objected to books that offended
them. Soon, books all began to look the same as writers tried to avoid offending
anybody.

. . .This was not enough, however, and society as a whole decided to simply burn
books rather than permit conflicting opinions."

That so reminds me of some lyrics in QUEEN's song titled: One Vision.

One man, one goal,
One mission.
One heart, one soul,
Just one solution.

I had a dream when I was young,
A dream of sweet illusion:
A glimpse of hope and unity,
And visions of one sweet union.

So give me your hands,
Give me your hearts.
I'm ready.
There's only one direction.
One world, one nation,
One vision.

You see; by selectively banning books, we make the world a nice safe little haven
for only one ideology, one perspective, and one morality; which of course everyone
must accept on penalty of being branded an insurrectionist, a traitor, and/or
deplorable, non patriotic, an enemy of unity, toxic, and/or a tumor.

Later in the novel, the main character meets a former English professor who
laments;

"The current state of society is due to the cowardice of people like himself who
would not speak out against book burning when it was still possible to stop it."
_