Thomas Prosser, an Associate Professor in European social policy at Cardiff University, has written an excellent Substack post about why liberals, as well as conservatives, should be concerned about PayPal’s decision to deplatform the Daily Sceptic and the Free Speech Union. Here’s how it begins:
This week, Paypal froze the accounts of Toby Young, a British right-wing journalist and bête noire of liberals. Affected accounts include the Daily Sceptic (a website) and Free Speech Union (a body which campaigns for free speech), Young being a founder of both. Seemingly, Paypal took the decision on political grounds, the firm not contradicting reports. British right-wingers have reacted angrily, accusing Paypal of attacking freedom of speech. I agree. In a liberal democracy, firms should not refuse services on political grounds. And Paypal acts as a quasi-public utility, making its actions more serious.
To my surprise, many liberals do not agree, making this a fascinating example of how liberals are increasingly on the wrong side of free speech debates. Writing in the New Statesman, Chris Stokel-Walker argued that firms had the right to deny services to certain people, citing the Ashers case in which a baker refused to supply a cake with a message promoting same sex marriage; Young and the Free Speech Union supported the baker.
Mention of this case is mischievous. Paypal were not asked to circulate a message with which they disagreed; moreover, many liberals opposed the Ashers baker and Young’s position should be irrelevant. More broadly, I am surprised that liberals do not recognize the dangers of corporations engaging in censorship. For example, firms have undertaken many of the acts which have eroded Hungarian democracy, liberals denouncing such attacks. Where does this stop? Is it legitimate to deprive Young of electricity and a mobile phone?
The argument that the incident is isolated and therefore less important is more appealing, yet has problems. As I have written before, conservatives increasingly face social pressure, reflecting the hegemony of liberal values in postmaterial societies. Given the education cleavage, there are high proportions of liberals in corporations, making such incidents more likely. In other words, this affair is part of a pattern and represents a threat to liberal democracy.
We might reflect on why liberals have not defended Young, this enabling insight into the changing profile of liberalism and subsequent threats to democracy. I suspect that liberals are falling victim to misfiring heuristics and group loyalties.
[…]The involvement of Toby Young is relevant, Young long being a liberal hate figure. Differences in the status of liberals and right-populists are important, further disincentivizing liberal defences of Young. As ever, social media makes individual dissent more difficult.
A “liberal hate figure”! Ooh er missus!
Worth reading in full.
You can subscribe to Thomas Prosser’s Substack account here.
Stop Press: I responded to the argument that PayPal’s right to freedom of association means they can kick whoever they like off their platform on GB News today. You can watch a clip here.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Such weakminded thinking, that says
Natural == Good
aridet aridum, was the motto of the Leeds man who drained the Norfolk Fens of their natural sogginess. Yet the Green Blob goes into overdrive whenever the waters reclaim their place, screaming that “man-made climate change” is causing flooding which in turn, they say, is robbing the poor nesting birds of their homes (and the nimbys of their back yards).
You can’t fix ignorant and stupid.
Correction, arridet aridum
Can I assume that a ‘Special Representative for Nature’ will campaign ferociously to stop our green and pleasant land from being covered in solar panels and to prevent our skies being infested with bird killing windmills? Also will this Nature representative fervently make representations to the Foreign Office to speak out against the lithium mines which are devastating the environment in some areas of our planet in order to save the planet by pushing us all into EVs?
Will she be looking into why there has been a big increase in strandings of whales, dolphins and porpoises around the UK shores that seems to correlate with the increase in the off shore windmill industry….no, thought not.
Well said but I don’t think it will happen.
Not a chance!
Does this mean that all foreign aid will be dependent on receiving countries agreeing to turn their backs on cheap energy (i.e. carbon-based fuels) and stifle their emerging economies so that they can join the UK on the descent back down to poverty in a net-zero world?
“In fact, why not abolish Parliament – do away with the pretence that there is any form of representative democracy in Westminster?”
This is the problem. Our ‘representatives’ are not interested in representing ‘the people’. There is too much at stake for them to give up the lucrative gravy train they have embarked on as a career choice. Somehow the selection process for candidates has to be on the basis of their commitment to the community/nation rather the the tribe/party they choose to represent. Government has become an organised dodgy cartel full of rent seekers and revolving door grifters. Perhaps a system that selects people at random like the Jury service, selecting candidates from a pool of people of a certain age and experience and other criteria would work better? And also, limit their term of office to one parliament or a maximum term of four-five years to eradicate career politicians milking the system.
If the public had wanted all these Green policies, they would have voted for the Green Party, which would have a large majority in Parliament. But the public DIDN’T vote for the Green Party or its crazed, destructive policies.
For years the Green Party had only ONE MP in Parliament. Now they have FOUR.
And yet every political party is carrying out Extreme Green policies WITHOUT A MANDATE from the voters, without permission from the voters, without the consent of the voters.
It’s a travesty of democracy.
If she will “put climate and nature at the heart of our foreign policy” then she will undoubtedly promote the creation of CO2 as the ‘Oxygen’ of plant life, especially since atmospheric CO2 values are currently so low.
Hope dies last.