15 Counter-Currents books and 4 Jared Taylor books have been purged from Amazon

You can buy them directly from counter-currents.
Do their actions stop disadvantaging us because they're a private business?

Since when have private businesses ever had to pander to literally every ideological position out there? Would you also demand that a Christian bookseller start selling Islamic literature?

Yes

Dont give a fuck about the white nationalist shit but Bowden? Damn that's a shame. I still havent got any of his books. Know where I should start? I absolutley loved his speeches and lectures.

Ok, counter-currents needs to start selling Marxist and feminist literature too.

I am perfectly comfortable with violating Jeff Bezos' economic freedom for the sake of my race, so I don't care about this lolbertarian argument.

Not a single book worth reading among them. Fuck off back to

Attached: 1547445739651.png (368x356, 58K)

You're just upset that people disagree with your racist nonsense. I'd urge you to grow up and stop blaming the world for your problems. You will better off for it.

Y'aint read any of em.
You're just upset that people disagree with your Mammonist nonsense. I'd urge you to grow up and stop blaming racists for your problems. You will better off for it.

lol you'll never be a girl

I agree that capitalism is cancer (literally), but blaming minorities for it isn't the solution. Something like conservative (in the sense of conserving the resources / space we have and not needlessly exploiting it) socialism is the way to go desu.

Found the incel

Attached: 5150ED03-2753-4BEC-9187-D58AD9F90192.jpg (1920x1080, 316K)

Fascism is conservative socialism without the racism

Found the hon

>Someday I will become the gf, you just wait!!!

If amazon starts banning books, then that opens up a market for "THE FORBIDDEN BOOKS". Which someone could sell on thier own website for jacked up prices

>Since when have private businesses ever had to pander to literally every ideological position out there?
After they become megacorporations that are more profitable and powerful than most governments.

lmao theyre free on libgen though

Dugin's books have been banned from Amazon for like 2 years. This is nothing new.

Lmfao, he got you

If private companies selling all material without restriction is a right, then so is housing and healthcare. Do you support the government ensuring every person has a place to stay and adequate medical treatment?

>western civilization bites back

is this really so dangerous that it must be banned? it sounds like one of those lauren southern tier conservacuck meme books
>and this time... the aggression isn't "micro"

Attached: 1532797360863.jpg (244x295, 32K)

Yikes.

Your argument completely misrepresents what Amazon is and how it functions. It's not a brick and mortar store it is a marketplace and this is essentislly censorship.

Yes. I'm not a Capitalist.

Bowden was actually intelligent unlike conservacucks
I dont like the kind of people he associated with but he was a really great guy and its a shame he's gone

gooddamn cringe

Ignoring the fact that Amazon is still a bricks and mortar store (those books gotta be houses somewhere), why would this change anything about whether it's forced to sell products it doesn't want to?

I wish frogtwitter would leave

Attached: 1551153250782m.jpg (743x1024, 129K)

>>F. Roger Devlin, Sexual Utopia in Power (Kindle)
this was pretty gud

>those books gotta be houses somewhere
That's not what brick and mortar store means, you disingenuous retard.

My point still stands. Why is a private company forced to sell products they don't want?

Because they are a massive megacorporation that is more profitable and powerful than most countries. You comparing them to the local corner store is just dishonest and in bad faith.

Sure. Where do we go now?

How did so many corporate bootlickers get on lit?

>Because they are a massive megacorporation that is more profitable and powerful than most countries.
That's why they're purging their sortiment of wrongthink in order to avoid offending too many people and stay competitive.

How did "leftism" become about encouraging the capitalist oligopoly to exercise arbitrary power over what goods and services people are allowed to access and which people are allowed to access them.

We have literal Communists going around doing the lolbertarian "they can sell to whoever they want to" argument, exact same argument that the right was making about the gay wedding cake thing in a different (much broader and more precedent-setting, slippery-slopey) context.

What the fuck is going on.

Opportunism caused by the "football team" view of politics mixed with internet narcissism.

but it's true, bakers shouldn't be forced to bake cakes for people they don't like and companies have no obligation to sell books their ceo doesn't want to sell.

A Bakery ≠ Fucking Amazon

Once the US government enforces the right for every person to have a house, food, and adequate healthcare, then I'd agree that there's a precedent for a vast information outlet like Amazon to sell all books. Until then though, so long as people get upset that they can't be far-right propaganda but aren't upset that there's homeless people without housing or people in Flint without access to clean drinking water, then those people would be hypocrites. Race is no excuse either, you can't demand Amazon let people by white supremacist books but then say "well niggers shouldnt get houses because theyre niggers."

can't buy*

this doesn't even begin to make sense.

You're such a dishonest little toad.

>gibs
>"far-right"
>"white supremacist"

OK. What if the water utility services for your municipality have been privatized, and the company that controls them decides that you're an asshole and they don't want to do business with you. Guess you're going to pull up your bootstraps and dig a well in your backyard?

>Typing that out to avoid saying "Abuse by corporations is a good thing when they're 'leftist' corporations"
Behold the power of the basic-bitch woke twitter white boy!

Why not support access to housing and healthcare as a right for all Americans, if it'd help your case that access to whatever books you want through Amazon is right too?

are you planning to get married, faggot?

Those things are not inherently connected

?

All this sperging out over whether or not Amazon has a LEGAL right to do this is irrelevant. This kind of thing marks a fairly important shift in what "Amazon" represents. For quite a while, it represented itself as a marketplace bazaar where just about any book could be sold provided it wasn't illegal. That old outlook is thoroughly dead, and we're seeing the same general pattern of ideological censorship seen on other big tech platforms.

Yes, to a beautiful transwoman

you're comparing a scenario where the access to water is being denied for arbitrary reasons to another where a baker is refusing to bake a cake for a homosexual wedding, which tells me you're just an assblasted faggot throwing a tantrum here.

You could have just said you're fine with tech monopolists using their power to censor people you hate. You would have avoided sounding like a retard. You'd still be evil, but less retarded.

Why not? You're asking the government to step in to fix a flaw of the free market (regulate Amazon so that it can't ban whichever books it want on a whim.) That's no different to asking the government to step to fix another flaw of the free market (people lack access to clean water/healthcare/shelter etc. because businesses aren't compelled to give to them.)

If your logic is that "well I want to read those books but I don't want black people in Flint, MI to have clean water", why should anyone to listen to you then? Should a black person support your right to buy anti-black books on Amazon?

Who gives a shit? Go somewhere else?
If you faggots hate Amazon so much, why would you care about their store in the first place? Wouldn't you be GLAD they're doing this, because it makes them look bad?
That user is right- they're a private corporation. They can do whatever the fuck they want because they're not the only store selling fucking books on the internet. Just like that retarded christian cake shop doesn't have to make gays cakes if they don't want to. Is it ignorant and stupid? Definitely. Is it their right? Also definitely. Anything less isn't freedom.

You're comparing a local baker refusing to bake a cake to a multi-national corporation refusing to have certain print-on-demand books available!

Corporate cuckhold.
Why do neo-liberals pretend to care about social issues so that they can use them to divert attention away from megacorporations gaining more and more power?

So? They're both businesses with the right to refuse service to whoever they want because you have the right to fuck off to another website. What's your argument that Amazon SHOULDN'T be allowed to plug what they want? It's THEIR fucking store, you retard.

>Those quads
Mega satan approves of corporate power!

The legal argument would be that their size makes them more of a "common carrier" than a regular business. That would be based on things like market share, overall revenues, etc. Traditional antitrust analysis. Remember, there is no actual right for "corporations" to even exist. Corporate charters are government-granted legal documents, and governments can set the terms of incorporation however they desire.

>corporate power
>the freedom to sell what you want to sell and not what people that hate your store want you to sell is considered power
You're extremely entitled. Amazon doesn't owe you shit, you know. Just because they're big and you think they have a responsibility to do this or that, they don't. If they were the only store I was allowed to buy books from, I'd agree with you wholeheartedly. Otherwise, they have the right to tell me to fuck off if I don't like their store because if I were a business owner I'd want the right to tell them to fuck off if they tried to force me to shill some Shekelstein Steinberg book or something. It's not rocket science, kid, it's just freedom.
Exactly, and forcing Amazon to carry books they don't want to carry would set a precedent for the entire market, which the US government would never do because they're in bed with each other. Also, that argument would never hold up in court because Amazon lawyers would simply say the removal of the books was justified based on the hateful etc content of the books. They'd just argue the books were harmful and be fine.

They do not correlate to each other, one does not lead to the other, you fucking smoothbrain. They have nothing to do with one another and your point is a non-sequitour. You are a disingenuous actor only looking for reason to legitimize your bigotry and double standards. Simple as that.
>Should a black person support your right to buy anti-black books on Amazon?
Yes, every sane person should be against multi-national corporations, with no responsibility to the populous, having the power to ban certain ideas from being marketed and thus discussed, you white-bread liberal collaborationist mongoloid socdem.

>12676642
The intended comparison is between Amazon denying access to its monopolistic market share and the water utility. That should have been obvious but apparently your main intention here is to vent as much vulgarity and anger as possible at whoever talks back to you.

I might also note that you dodged my question.

Would you be OK if I bought anti-white books on Amazon too?

>he thinks the freedom amazon possesses will carry over to his own small business
>he thinks the government won't force him to sell gay cakes or shill kike books
>he still believes in consistent economic models like libertarianism or neoliberalism and doesn't know governments and corporations are two sides of the same globohomo shekel
lmao

Yes, you fucking retard. I have ideals and standards, unlike you.

>will carry over to his own small business
uh, it literally does and did in the very same "counter argument" you so cleverly greentexted at me. remember that little homohating cake shop that made national headlines because they were a brick and mortar mom and pop shop that said they hate fags?
turns out that tiny little, "SMALL" business, had the same rights as big ol' evil Amazon. you dumbass motherfucker. you're just projecting your bias onto what-if scenarios and pretending like that's an argument. i'm not a small business owner, but if I were I'd have the same freedom to tell you to eat my dick as Amazon does, and just because you say "LOL YEAH RIGHT LALALAA" and plug your ears doesn't mean it's not true.

>more freedom for multi-billionaires!
How's bezos' cock taste?
>just use another service!
Yeah fuck those niggers who wanted to be seated at their diner!

Lol do you think everybody else is like you and doesnt have principles? If I say free market place for ideas, i actually mean it. I'm not like you who says it so that they can seem open minded but then defend a corporation transgressing on that marketplace.
You're a bootlicker.

So, if I'm reading this right, you want to be able to buy white supremacist books out of sheer curiosity. You won't use those ideas to promote sectarianism and oppression of non-white people, because these have no actual bearing on the real world. You'd be OK with more black people getting into politics, because these pro-white books you've read would have nothing to say about that.

Am I correct?

Multibillionares are people too. Just because you and I are poor and he's not doesn't mean he's less human than I am. Some humanitarian you are lmao. Bezos and his company deserve every freedom that I do, that's the premise of this country. He was born with more privilege and opportunity than I was, but that doesn't mean he doesn't deserve the same rights that I have.
And yes, if you've ever interacted with actual black people, they tend to willingly choose to eat at places they know aren't operated by racists rather than go to the KKK BBQ and wonder why nobody is accommodating. It's all about freedom, and as long as my freedom doesn't impose on your freedom, it's allowed no matter how upset it makes you. Ask the supreme court, they've already agreed with me.

I should have clarified it as multibillion dollar corporation.
And if you've ever read a history book, youd probably realize that the argument "well if they're not wanted there, why would they want to eat there?" Was used by actual racists and KKK clansmen to deny serving blacks during the civil rights movement

>you want to be able to buy white supremacist books out of sheer curiosity.
I want them to be available to anyone who wants them for whatever reason they want.
>You won't use those ideas to promote sectarianism and oppression of non-white people
I want the people who wish to promote those things to have the legal right to promote those things and the same is true of people having the right to promote the oppression(a bullshit word by the way) of white people, or anyone else.
>You'd be OK with more black people getting into politics
I %100 support the right of Blacks, Whites, Mexicans, Jews, and everyone else to politically advocate for their best interests.
>because these pro-white books you've read
You have no idea what I've read. You do not know what my politics are. You are a pee-brained narcissist.
>Am I correct?
Sincerely, Kill yourself, you braindead bigot.

>amazon the corporation is bezos the person
Not after his wife is through with the divorce case.

It's a store ran by people that don't want to put those books in their store. Who goes to court when they get sued? The fucking storefront? The corporation? No, the people that represent the people that run the store. Don't be dense.
And if you'd ever read a book before you'd know that black people during the civil rights era weren't allowed to eat fucking ANYWHERE, you dense fuck. Context matters to people that don't have autism and there's a blatant difference between hate crime and personal freedom. Again, ask the supreme court and what they think about religious cakes if you're still struggling with this part.

>the law says it's ok for this to happen
Yeah, the law, the unerring moral authority. I'm so glad that corporations are considered people under the law and have the legal right to donate millions to politicians too!

It's not about it being the law, it's the principle of it. The reason it's a law in the first place, you peabrained chimp. It's okay for it to happen because it's FREEDOM. Is that a foreign concept to you? You can't just force people to do things they don't want to do even if you don't like it. Just because it makes you upset doesn't mean it's infringing on your freedom. If it's not infringing on your ability to go buy that book, then it's allowed. It's their right. It's THEIR store. They made it, they own it. Simple as that. And no matter how much you complain on Yea Forums, that'll never ever change because it's written into our own constitution. You'll have to move to China if you don't like the way that works.

Well, in that case, I agree with your principles, even if I don't agree with your ideas on race.

>Sincerely, Kill yourself, you braindead bigot.
If i die, it'll be due to alcohol poisoning, which i leave up the fates

People think that because Amazon takes advantage of their freedom, they don't deserve that freedom. But if we took away freedom from everybody who abused it, it wouldn't be real freedom in the first place.

The supreme court ruling was a narrow ruling. That means it was only for that specific case and didnt set a larger precedent you fucking retard.

>Is it ignorant and stupid?
Ignorant of what?

Yet Amazon is pulling books off their store and not being sued for it. Weird. Lmao

>fuck the civil rights movement
You could have started with that so I knew where you stood

fuck off christfag

It looks like this specific case just happened yesterday. Either way, suing a multi-billion dollar corporation sounds like a lost cause.

If you didn't have a real argument why'd you even bother replying? Did it make you feel better? Does it make you feel less "btfo" to pretend you're simply above replying instead of just at a loss for a logical argument as to why you think the way you do? Admitting you're wrong is a part of growing up. May as well start now, sport.

And suing a mom-and-pop brick and mortar store DIDN'T seem like a lost cause, yet they lost anyways. Weird. Lmao

That's not a very effective answer. You're letting your anger get the best of you.

Alright then, explain to me how refusing to serve black people is any different from refusing to serve white nationalists? If the argument is: I dont want to serve you, for whatever reason, then I shouldnt have to serve you, then whether or not the discrimination is based on race or belief shouldnt matter because ultimately, it's my freedom to choose who I do and dont serve for any reason I deem fit

If you can offer a halfway decent answer, I'll concede, because ultimately I do agree with you about businesses being able to serve who they want. I'm just trying to reconcile the civil rights movements problems with today's and I cant come up with a good answer. I'm just being comabatitive because it's funny to me

Lol, if you dont know the details of the ruling then you dont know why you sound stupid right now

Libertarians are worse than niggers and jannies combined. Every time a company does some degenerate shit that is harmful to my people, like clockwork, they come in with the
>"actually, it's not bad that this bad thing happened to you because the person who did it had the right to do it under the current liberal laws"
faggotry. I don't even talk to them anymore. The fact that the left can get their adult diapers in a bunch about the "rise of the right" when most of them are just liberals (libertarianism and capitalism are LIBERALISM) just shows how decadent and used to hegemony they actually are. Fuck all you goddamn white niggers.

Attached: cute hat.jpg (334x506, 42K)