You're right - "a boycotted corporation can continue to communicate, advertise, etc. in numerous ways."
A business that goes under because of a boycott cannot.
How does a company that no longer exists maintain bank accounts and a social media presence? They literally ceased to exist because no one spent any money on them due to the boycott.
That's not to say the other guy's overall point is correct. He's full of shit. But he's still right about that one thing.
People no longer visiting a buisness that can advertise and process payments.
IS NOT THE SAME AS
An individual having their accounts erased for wrong think.
You're comparing the right of people to discriminate where they spend their money to the right of companies to discriminate who can use their services.
I'm all for both, but to pretend they are the same thing is retarded.
You're right - "a boycotted corporation can continue to communicate, advertise, etc. in numerous ways." A business that goes under because of a boycott cannot.
That's factually wrong. They still have their social media accounts. They still have their banks.
What are you even implying?
That we cannot choose where to shop and or spend money?
How does a company that no longer exists maintain bank accounts and a social media presence? They literally ceased to exist because no one spent any money on them due to the boycott.
That's not to say the other guy's overall point is correct. He's full of shit. But he's still right about that one thing.
People no longer visiting a buisness that can advertise and process payments.
IS NOT THE SAME AS
An individual having their accounts erased for wrong think.
You're comparing the right of people to discriminate where they spend their money to the right of companies to discriminate who can use their services.
I'm all for both, but to pretend they are the same thing is retarded.