So, French courts think that the personal information of those who would dare Tweet anything the Tribe doesn’t like ought to be revealed to them. Twitter ignores French courts, citing First Amendment protections. Yawn, right? Who cares?
But here’s something to consider: it’s a short journey from trade agreements like GATT and NAFTA to “hate speech” language being worked into treaties. “But,” you scoff, “treaties are not able to interfere with the Constitution that way, so it’s impossible.”
Fair enough. But consider the possible work around (and pay attention): a treaty CAN mandate that any company doing business in country X must have certain policies that are negotiated.
Such a measure would not be considered a non-tariff trade barrier IF it can be argued–and I believe it will be, eventually–that such a measure is necessary for “health and safety” purposes.
Imagine this: The Transatlantic Free Trade Zone gets going in 2015. Farmzall Tractor of Corncob, Illinois wants to sell tractors to French farmers. New market!
But the French government looks through the Farmzall Employee Manual and Farmzall corporate policy and says: “You don’t monitor your employees’ social media and you don’t fire them for publishing inflammatory or hate speech, which you can legally do as a private employer, despite what the First Amendment says. Thus, you can’t do business in France. This is a health and safety issue. We want French citizens to rest easy knowing no business is done with companies that condone RACISM anywhere in the world.”
I forsee this kind of thing coming. International capitalism IS a threat to freedom. And Twitter successfully being sued and fined for allowing speech–sued by JEWS, for pete’s sake!–in French courts makes the future of free expression of opinion look even more threatened than it is now.
Think about it.