Coercing “free speech” on private social media platforms is the type of authoritarianism we are supposed to be fighting

Authoritarianism is always sold under the label of humanitarianism. The fine print is never discussed, nor are the possible unintended consequences. Yet it never ceases to amaze me when activists for a particular liberty immediately throw their support behind an authoritarian measure wearing the humanitarian skin suit. The one piece of legislative abomination in particular is Florida’s Senate Bill 1266, the “Stop The Social Media Censorship Act“, which would strangle social media platforms in the state with authoritarian speech codes, and would certainly ensure social media’s rapid departure from such a repressive environment.

Liberty means liberty for all, including owners of private social media companies. It’s indecent and immoral to step into a bakery and demand a cake that they don’t want to bake you. It is equally indecent to create a free profile on a social media website, set up shop, and throw your weight around like you own the place. You’re a customer, and if you don’t like the service, leave. Owners of businesses have just as much of a right to refuse service as you, the customer, do of refusing to patronize them. There are plenty of other internet platforms to choose from. Or you could create your own, as I have here. I use Facebook, yet I’m able to understand the immorality of attempting to use government to coerce my will upon the private company. I also understand the unimaginable danger of giving government ever more power over the choices of private businesses, and private individuals.

“if you don’t like the service, leave” is a great motto in a free society. It affirms the rights of business owners not to be bullied by mobs of people with an unhealthy sense of entitlement. Yet the irony is that, in a free society, few businesses will take that attitude for fear of losing their customer base to their competitors. The power of choice that the consumer holds is what keeps business in line, producing what they want. No tyrannical piece of legislation required.

We need to rid ourselves of the belief, instilled in us at a young age through government schools, that our elected officials hold a magic wand, that when waved will produce a paradise devoid of side-effects or unintended consequences. This is the most dangerous superstition, which boiled down is a faith in legislative violence. “If only we allow the kind of violence that we support, the world will be made better!”  We clamor for a nanny state and then wonder when it also wants to forcibly inject us with poison.

Author: S. Smith