[mohamedkoubaa]

The transnational private sector is neither morally consistent nor geopolitically neutral.

The transnational private sector is neither morally consistent nor geopolitically neutral.

The transnational private sector is neither morally consistent nor geopolitically neutral.

[Aunche]

Maybe only a handful of people morally consistent or geopolitically neutral. It's unlikely that Saudi Arabia actually cares if Meta gets themselves kicked out of the nation, but it's easy to blame Meta because money in their pocket is money that isn't in mine. Meanwhile, oil money is ultimately what enables Saudi Arabia to get away with human rights abuses, but don't you dare do anything that makes me pay more at the pump.

[pear01]

But is it not consistent to be consistently inconsistent?

But is it not consistent to be consistently inconsistent?

But is it not consistent to be consistently inconsistent?

[flawn]

That would mean regulation of social media companies seems appropriate.

That would mean regulation of social media companies seems appropriate.

That would mean regulation of social media companies seems appropriate.

[AlexandrB]

So what? Very few organizations are morally consistent or geopolitically neutral. Especially in 2026 where political polarization is the norm.

Despite Meta's self serving actions here their morals are significantly better than those of Saudi Arabia or the UAE.

[pear01]

Very few? Try none.

Unless the moral position is something akin to realist self interest, in which case the apparent "inconsistency" is actually internally quite consistent. Perhaps the lack of consistent moral positions in competing paradigms is less an interesting phenomena to point out and more a tell that someone is laboring under an extremely naive conception of human morality.

[mohamedkoubaa]

I'm not complaining about it I'm just pointing out that widely held assumptions are false