[brass_cannon]

But you're missing a huge point here. Visa and MasterCard don't have a responsibility to allow you access to their networks.

This is akin to arguing that your free speech rights are infringed upon when a moderator removes your comment on their board.

[trevelyan]

I think your analogy is flawed in this case. Government-enforced monopolies have an implicit social responsibility to abide by social norms when conducting business. This is more akin to a subway refusing to carry a newspaper publisher because of something they published.

To the extent that a refusal of service violates social norms this creates a legitimate grievance in the absence of reasonable alternatives because of public policy.

[brass_cannon]

To me, the fact that Visa / MasterCard are in a heavily regulated (and to some extent, subsidized) industry is a separate issue. Perhaps the government should have less influence on these card associations, but the fact remains that they are still private entities.

Perhaps my analogy was not quite accurate, but I think your analogy goes too far on the other side. A subway is wholly owned by, and operated under, the budget of a government.

I understand, and sympathize with 12341sa's outrage, but his comment implies I have a right to purchase goods using a Visa or MasterCard.

[trevelyan]

I'm not arguing that you have the right to a credit card. But you should not be discriminated against on grounds that violate the social compact. Otherwise, your argument suggests it would be legitimate for Visa and Mastercard to refuse to process donations for specific political parties or politicians. Or for Paypal to close the accounts of people who vote.

I think most people would accept that there is a fundamental right to engage in peaceful trade. And just thinking of the issue practically, there are far more ways for someone denied access to the subway to get to their destination than there are ways for people to collect money remotely without access to the banking infrastructure and credit transfer services.

[pessimizer]

If the government was making calls to message boards, asking them to remove my comments, I might be suspicious that my free speech rights are being infringed upon.

I might suspect this even before I hear that the government is lobbying for those specific bulletin boards being excluded from pending Russian regulation.

[brass_cannon]

AFAIK (and I may be off here), the government has not officially requested that any entity take negative action against Wikileaks.

The implied threat that action may be taken against them is there, and individual representatives have spoken out against Wikileaks, but I do not believe the government has officially asked / demanded for third parties to cut ties with Wikileaks.

[wefqwefqwf]

You don't think the right way.

This is a hold up because: - Your bank provides you a service: credit/debit card, they have to because you are their customer. - Visa provides a service to your bank

Visa and Mastercard have a responsability to allow your bank access to their networks. To whom the money goes is none of their business.