Over the past few weeks, Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren has emerged as one of the only 2020 presidential candidates, on either the left or the right, to aggressively signal against the increasing monopoly powers of Big Tech. In several Facebook ads, tweets, and in a March 8th rally on Long Island, Senator Warren spoke out against the “freeloading billionaires” who run Facebook, Google, Apple, and Amazon, alluding to the companies’ penchant for stifling competition and compromising user privacy.
This line of attack against the demonstrably leftist Big Tech is odd coming from the supposedly socialist senator. In fact, it seems as if Warren is taking the principled libertarian line, expressing outrage that the Silicon Valley mega-corporations are simply discouraging more capitalist competition and market choice through their ascendance to monopoly status. For those on the left and right who are more in favor of nationalizing specific industries and services, as indeed Warren herself has claimed to be, why is simply breaking up such large companies necessarily a good thing, especially when several of these companies could be argued to be natural monopolies?
Moreover, how does breaking up such enormous companies now ensure that monopolies won’t simply re-form in the future through a combination of the mechanistic forces of laissez-faire capitalism and the underhanded practices of (((crony capitalism))), which will undoubtedly slip through the cracks of any regulation that Warren may one day be successful in passing? Of the current tech giants, none were “first movers” in their respective markets. They emerged as leaders over the course of decades. At least part of their success is attributable to the fact that they have naturally filled certain niches better than their competitors, achieving monopoly status as user bases flocked to their respective services. How would Warren’s plan prevent this predictable capitalist process from happening again in the future, thereby sending us back to square one and forcing us to repeat the breaking up process all over again?
Notably absent from Senator Warren’s criticisms, of course, is any comment about the increasingly censorious and oppressive nature of Google et al. Big Tech companies now routinely silence any dissenting voices – especially those of a “far right” or third position flavor – that dare to oppose the mainstream narrative on any hot-topic issue. Even center-left idiots like Sargon of Akkad have been banned from Patreon for non-politically correct speech, and Warren’s own anti-Facebook monopoly ads were removed by Facebook staff until she called attention to the fact on Twitter.
Nothing will ever truly change the nature of the current censorious climate of social media, payment processors, search engines, web hosts, etc., until they are forced, by a president who isn’t a slave to the (((ruling elite))), to operate according to the Constitution. Companies must be held to the standards that every individual living within the United States is subject to every day of their lives. What’s more, forcing companies to adhere to the First Amendment would increase the competition that politicians like Warren pretend to care about by ensuring that alternative platforms would never have their payment processors or hosting privileges revoked because of uncensored user posts.
Warren gave the game away around a week after her original comments on breaking up Big Tech, just in case anyone on our side imagined that her anti-monopoly rhetoric may be motivated by concerns over increasing censorship. On March 18th, she tweeted:Senator Warren neglects to mention what crime white nationalists would have to commit in order for her to “go after” them, leaving the reader to conclude that white nationalists would be prosecuted simply for the crime of holding unacceptable opinions. The reader is also left to ponder why, if existing Big Tech companies are so good at “going after” white nationalists now, as they have repeatedly proven themselves to be, why on Earth would Warren wish to interfere with their operations once elected President?