Quote Originally Posted by CS1983 View Post
I'm interested in principles. I'm curious why it's OK to do something drastic but then when that principle is applied to something less drastic, people start calling foul.

In the example 00tec gave, a corporation, which has far more buying power than individuals, could theoretically do whatever it wants contra the people. I'm not OK with that. But I'm curious as to why we have gone so far down the "muh capitalism!", "muh constitution-be-damned,-SCOTUS-says" rabbit hole, that we literally have warped ourselves into what is actually a far worse situation as a society than the Founding Fathers faced.
Oh c'mon, let's not exaggerate. We have a lot of wannabe-Stalins wanting to fundamentally change America and using Maoist tactics to implement a cultural revolution but they do NOT have legal power (yet) -- and they're not the corporations you're railing at. In fact, the Stalin/Mao-wannabes are anti-corporation (except where they can extort them for funding).

The Founding Fathers faced a government that stated their interests would be represented by Englishmen across the ocean, didn't recognize the right of habeas corpus, thought nothing of conducting "searches" for any reason and to any extent they desired, commandeered private quarters to house the soldiers used to implement their policies, impressed men to serve in the Royal Navy at whim, etc. We are facing nothing like that today as a society and certainly not from corporations. If anything, 4chan and computer-savvy anarchists/leftists are far more dangerous to the culture, liberty, and society than property owners deciding what they want to name their property or what behaviors they want to tolerate on their property.