Sen. Rand Paul (R–Ky.) has long been one of the few refreshing voices out of Washington, D.C., when it comes to free speech, including free speech on social media and elsewhere in the digital realm. He was one of just two senators to vote against FOSTA, the law that started the trend of trying to carve out Section 230 exceptions for every bad thing.
As readers of this newsletter know, Section 230 has been fundamental to the development and flourishing of free speech online.
Now, Paul has changed his mind about it. "I will pursue legislation toward" ending Section 230's protections for tech companies, the Kentucky Republican wrote in the New York Post this week.
So... he's pissy at Google for not doing as they're told even though when faced with the opposite, he said something quite different.
Also, this has actually been resolved already:
"The individual who posted the video finally took down the video under threat of legal penalty," per Paul's Post op-ed.
Maybe we should fundraise a bag of gummies for Mr. Paul so he gets over it and chills. iirc those are legal in DC.
Very important never to take Rand literally, his role is to be "out there", which means covering the flanks from the Libertarian / Insider vs. Outsider optics.
It's WWE hero and heel.
Remember that Ron Paul is in many ways the ideological godfather of America First, big in the 80's when Trump was getting his feet wet, a prelude to The Reform Party run.
Trump brought ending Section 230 into the Overton Window in V1. Since then, it's been Rand's job to good cop for the Libertarians... bringing the rug pull of reality now is the coup de grâce.
Look no further than the 2016 debates to witness in retrospect how obvious it is that, anytime Rand seemingly goes against Trump, its ultimately to help Trump.
How has RP been wrt Trump's behavior as king and supreme dictator, e.g., taking war-like actions (Venezuela) or proposing what amounts to global conquest (Greenland) and making unilateral economic decisions (tariffs) all on his own?
I don't follow politics much, but a lot of this seems extraordinarily at odds w/ Libertarian ethos as I understand it. Although maybe RP doesn't pretend to that as much as I'm imagining?
He's been a pain in the butt to the Executive Branch.
How?
I think the most visible one was to vote against the BBB
Also doesn't support the Venezuela narrative or the Greenland narrative
It's bonkers to me how many talking heads of various types have switched seamlessly into the idea that the US has become a colonial power. Like, it's fine.
I'm not naive enough to think that realpolitik hasn't been the driving force behind pretty much everything since pretty much forever, but would expect some modest protest from certain directions, at least. (I'm discounting the protests from sources that protest everything, always.)
There's a huge difference between being the colony and being the colonizer.
I'm pondering mostly what's next in hardening. We have good encryption and we have independent means of trade. Time to start really developing microfabs? Still feels early.
Just what I was looking for -- thanks!