PayPal and the tech tyrants are out of control

Our corporate overlords are out of control. Just look at PayPal. It appears to have flirted with the idea of fining people for saying problematic things, for dealing in wrongthink. A briefly published new policy said users might have a whopping $2,500 seized from their coffers if PayPal believed they were engaged in ‘misinformation’ or ‘hate speech’. Just think about what an egregious affront this would have been not only to freedom of speech but also to the fundamentals of justice. Without a trial, presumably even without the right of representation, an individual or organisation could have been subjected to severe financial punishment on the say so of some hip moderator in California who didn’t like something they said. Tech tyranny is getting serious now.

PayPal backtracked on the policy incredibly swiftly. The published policy said any PayPal user who breaks the rules on misinformation or hateful commentary could be subject to ‘damages, including liquidated damages of $2,500 US dollars per violation, which may be debited from your PayPal account’. In short, offend PayPal’s woke bosses and a couple of grand might be spirited from your account. The online response to this threatened stiff fining of people with problematic views was intense. Even PayPal’s former president, David Marcus, couldn’t believe what he was reading. ‘It’s hard for me to openly criticise a company I used to love and gave so much to’, he said. ‘But PayPal’s new [policy] goes against everything I believe in. A private company now gets to decide to take your money if you say something they disagree with. Insanity.’ Insanity indeed.

Unsurprisingly, PayPal walked back the insanity. The policy was published ‘in error’, it said. This was ‘incorrect information’, it insisted. ‘PayPal is not fining people for misinformation and this language was never intended to be inserted in our policy…. We’re sorry for the confusion this has caused.’ You can’t blame us for being confused though, PayPal. You published the policy. Clearly you’ve discussed it. Clearly you’ve thought very seriously indeed about taking money from wrongthinkers as punishment for their polluted morality. We can give you the benefit of the doubt and accept that your idea was published in ‘error’ but this doesn’t distract from the fact that you had the idea, that you gave real consideration to the idea of seizing cash from thoughtcriminals.