Josh Hawley Is From the Government and He’s Here to Help
In the latest of a string of legislative proposals aimed at “Big Tech” Josh Hawley has proposed this nugget of nanny state numbskullery:
The first-term senator continued his crackdown on social media on Tuesday, introducing a bill that would ban infinite scroll, autoplay, and “awards linked to engagement” from social media platforms. That takes direct aim at every major social media site out there, including Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram’s neverending content streams and how Snapchat counts continuous streaks of messages between a pair of users.
As Hawley put it in a tweet introducing the bill, “big tech has embraced addiction as a business model” and its platforms are designed to “capture attention by using psychological tricks that make it impossible to look away.” So he’s proposing an all-out ban on autoplay and autofilled content, as well as a requirement that social media platforms allow users to set time limits on how long they can spend on the apps.
It’s not even an original argument. The same excuse for government intervention in the name of “addiction” has been applied to everything from video games to cell phones.
And none are Josh Hawley’s or the government’s business.
Note he isn’t going after Vegas casinos, long-noted masters of “psychological tricks” to keep you inside and playing, nor is he going after any of a dozen other industries where that argument could be at least be tangentially applied. No, the ambitious Mr. Hawley is going after boogeyman of the moment: “Big Tech.” Note the premise of what he is saying: BigTech is tricking you and only the government and I can step in to save you poor innocent people from the danger to our republic that is infinite scroll, ’cause that’s “addictive.” It was a silly argument for video games in the 80s, rap music in the 90s, the internet when it first came out, cell phones, and on and on. The latest technological innovations get so popular that ambitious politicians must cape up to save us, the poor stupid voting and donating public.
In his highly controversial speech at the National Conservatism Conference much focus was placed on the 11 usages and variations on “Cosmopolitan Elite”, class and other facets of his speech . But it was the ending of the speech that perhaps we should pay attention to:
I wonder if you remember the story of Horatius at the bridge. It happened in the early days of the Roman republic, sometime around 500 BC. The Etruscan army, the story goes, marched on Rome to invade, and the Roman defenses were caught off guard.
Eventually the fighting coalesced around a bridge leading across the Tiber into the city. All was chaos. The Roman generals, surprised and unsure, were falling back. The city seemed in great peril.
But a junior officer named Horatius thought otherwise. He saw that if the Roman army could simply hold the bridge long enough for the city to reset its defenses, the republic could be saved. So as the senior officers retreated, he advanced.
Macaulay tells us that as he charged to the front line, Horatius looked over his shoulder to the hills of Rome, and glimpsed his own home there, and knew it was worth defending. And so he took his stand.
No, Senator Hawley, I do not need you on the bridge of technology looking over your shoulder at hearth and home, and deciding that the wilds of the free and open internet are just too much for me and mine to bear without your benevolent protection. America doesn’t want you on that bridge, nor need you on that bridge. No one used any of the social media you decry for your own ambitious reasons who didn’t click “I agree” to the user agreement. If they didn’t read it, that is on them. A free and open internet does not need to die on a senatorial bridge over websites we won’t even be using 10 years from now just so you can feed the fever dreams of folks convinced it is the internet’s responsibility to unconditionally love everything they post.
If you cannot control your own social media content then maybe Senator Josh Hawley is the politician for you. If you think perceived victimhood of not having unfettered fame and glory on the interwebs is reason enough to sign away everyone else’s freedom, have at it.
But you can stand on that bridge alone.
Josh Hawley, like all ambitious men, is telling you who and what he is about. We should listen, and like Horatius look at our homes and country and decide their safety and freedom are worth more than the overreach of the Josh Hawleys of the world.
Won’t you think of the children!?!?Report
That’s as smart as all the anti-vaping junk going around.
He is thinking of the Children(tm)!Report
We tried that level of nannyism once – Prohibition – and it failed miserably.Report
Random thoughts…
1.) I have never heard of this guy but upon starting the essay, I assumed he was a Dem. I was a little surprised to learn he was GOPer. Not sure what that means but it was curious.
2.) What does it say about my age that as I read the following sentence, I had the noted thoughts (in parentheses)…
“It was a silly argument for video games in the 80s (Obviously… people didn’t understand them), rap music in the 90s (Obviously… racism), the internet when it first came out (It has it’s ills, but still a positive gamechanger), cell phones (Well, I do try to use mine less…)” and then when I think of “social media”, my response is, “Weeeeeeeeellllllll…. maybe he’s got a point.”
I’m oldReport
What it means is that the Right considers tech companies to be liberally biased and intends to destroy them by any means possible.
I am not making this up. Nor joking, nor exaggerating.Report
I’m in basic agreement with your thesis. The tech industry spins out a lot of money, and most of that money does not go to support Republican candidates or causes. Therefore it’s bad.
This is very likely why Republican politicians oppose Net Neutrality. If it’s good for Google, it’s bad for Republicans, is the thinking.
Meanwhile, Comcast has given us lots of money.
Republicanism used to be very solid for the free market. Whatever else you could say about Darrell Issa, he supported Net Neutrality, because that meant a freer market and more competition.
There are legitimately multiple sides to many questions, and it is very helpful to have people and parties that represent the various sides. It is not at all helpful to have people who advance bad-faith arguments for policies that would simply give them more political advantage.
The truly horrifying part of this is that by doing this, and not being super secretive about it, they destroy faith in democracy and the entire democratic process. People will assume that everyone is doing this, and that there are no honest arguments.
Such are the times we live in.Report
Something I saw over at LGM, a quote from a Confederate officer which I am going to use from now on:
“The Anglo-Saxon will accept tyranny rather than surrender to the inevitable consequences of a putrid electorate.”
All the things that Republicans used to consider important like markets, defense, morality have collapsed before the fear and loathing of those they consider inferior.
Tech companies= Liberals
Liberals= brown people and uppity women;
Therefore- Must Destroy
They will pay higher prices, or higher taxes, they will suffer all sorts of privation and hardship, or whatever indignities a police state will inflict, so long as they can be held one rung higher than their enemies.Report
That is good, Chip.Report
Also LBJ’s famous quote about a poor white cracker letting you rob him (indeed turning out his pockets for you) as long as he can feel superior to black people. I think the tariffs are proof of this quote.Report
Matt Y wrote the same thoughts on Vox regarding net neutrality. Republicans are used to telecoms, they are not used to tech companies so net neutrality is bad.
I also think they dislike tech companies because the tech companies choose to stay in “overregulated” and “ungovernable” Bay Area, California instead of moving to Alabama or Missourri but they never stop to think that their hardcore social conservatism might turn off companies that employ lots of young people including young women that might not like the sexist paternalism and anti-abortion views in those states.Report
New communication technologies, more broadly adopted by younger people rather than oldsters, always have a liberal bias. Related question I heard from Republican campaigners in 2008 (I think) when the Obama campaign was inventing ways to use big data and targeted communication: “Why do young tech people volunteer to work for the Democrats for three months for pizza and Mountain Dew, but don’t do the same thing for the Republicans?”Report
I still remember fondly Pajama Media whining that they couldn’t find a techie who’d volunteer to fix their web servers for them. Wanting to get paid is liberal bias!Report
The current disastrous state of the republic stems from the rage addiction that fuels right-wing media. If we can ban them as well as Instagram, this might be well worth it.Report
Infinite scroll is something the government should probably ban. How many people have dropped out of the labor force just because they’re determined to get to the end of the thread?Report
I could probably count them on one hand, even if I was missing a few fingers.Report
I’m not so sure. I hashtag about it and ever since then I’ve been trying to get to the bottom. I’m thinking of hooking my cordless drill to my scroll wheel.
What if the Russians or Chinese come up with a hack that links the bottom of one thread to the top of another random one, essentially turning the entire Internet into one large but finite thread, longer than any person could scroll through in one human lifetime? What if the Iranians then link the bottom of it back to the top to make a finite but infinitely repeating thread that continuously grows, similar to expansion after the Big Bang?
Clearly, we need Congress to set fixed rules about threads, nesting, and display preferences, with enforcement responsibilities given to the FCC, FEC, NRLB (because scrolling is work), DHS, DoD, CIA (Russian bots!), and NSA. I’d include NASA but they’d be happy to scroll down for fifty years as long as their budget doesn’t get cut.Report
Hawley is one of the worst members of Congress right now. There’s no problem that he doesn’t think has an authoritarian solution. And he’s perfectly willing to stoke racial/religious tensions.
We’ve often wondered what it would be like if Trump were competent. Hawley is the answer to that question. And that fascist is going to run for President one day.Report
Welp
This is what it looks like when people call for The Government To Do Something About The Problems. People wanted Something To Be Done about all the fake news on Facebook that got Trump elected. Something To Be Done about all those Nazi transphobes spewing their hate speech, making actual legitimate death threats. Something To Be Done about how evil capitalist bastards were using secret psychological power to hack the human brain, to turn people into zombies and suck all their money out of them. (it’s too bad Kim isn’t around anymore to tell us all about this, although she’d probably go into some side rant about how white women have been selectively bred to be affected by alcohol and susceptible to ASMR-induced hypnosis and that’s why she got drunk and cheated on her husband.)
But, anyway. This is what it looks like when you yell long enough about how there’s a Problem that needs Fixing (but, also, that we can’t expect the companies to do anything about it themselves because they’re private companies and thus not subject to any kind of restrictions on anything.)Report
So there is something interesting happening here.
Here is an article in National Review by Joel Kotkin:
https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2019/08/12/the-return-to-serfdom/
Where he lists the ills afflicting workers of the world.
In ordinary times, Kotkin could reliably be expected to identify heavy government taxation/ regulation as the culprit and prescribe a dose of free market economics.
But oddly, here he never identifies a culprit, and even more interestingly, locates the ills across the world, from America to France to China all of which have drastically different economic systems and policies and political structures and history.
He writes awkwardly:
“In embracing the “absolute premium of labor-saving measures” and loyally serving the needs of the least needful, we are undermining the social basis of both democracy and capitalism, creating an expanding market for ever more dependence on the state while undermining the dignity of large parts of our populations. ”
But of course…How would the flagship magazine of conservatism suggest we stop “loyally serving the needs of the least needful”?
Then there is this piece on National Conservatism over at Quillette:
https://quillette.com/2019/07/31/national-conservatism-and-the-preference-for-state-control/
Wherein the author Alexander William Salter documents the emerging divorce between the free market and social conservative wings of the conservative movement.
“Today we declare independence,” Hazony announced, “from neoliberalism, from libertarianism, from what they call classical liberalism. From the set of ideas that sees the atomic individual, the free and equal individual, as the only thing that matters in politics.”
I was thinking of these things when I noted that most of the Dem candidates (except Warren, Sanders, Harris and maybe one other I am overlooking) seem to be thinking in terms of how to do battle with a Republican party which is unified in its adherence to Reagan/ Thatcher free market dogma.
So they instinctively flinch from charges of socialism, and stay away from any sort of “big government” New Dealerism as if it were a third rail.
I don’t think we are in that Kansas any more.
Report
And then there’s this:
https://www.mediaite.com/tv/foxs-cavuto-calls-out-lou-dobbs-in-fiery-clash-what-has-trump-done-to-contain-deficits-and-the-debt/
“A panel between some of the biggest Fox Business anchors got heated between Neil Cavuto and Lou Dobbs over whether President Donald Trump has done enough to address deficits and the debt.”
Lou Dobbs is the new Republican Party; Neil Cavuto is in his rear view mirror and disappearing over the horizon.Report
Big government as the new Trumpian Populist/nationalist third rail is an astute and correct observationReport