PayPal could be banned from blocking accounts for political reasons

If governments create such onerous rules for participation in "regular society", then it should also ensure equal access.

There is so much regulation in financial services that only extra large players, $10,000,000,000+, are allowed to compete without someone elses permission.

It would be illegal for the FSU to accept payments without involving someone like Paypal.

Not just hard - illegal, like go directly to jail, do not pass go. A small organisation cannot meet the compliance requirements.

If the government passes a law like "Payment Services Regulations", that privileges large incumbent players, they need to include a non-discrimination clause.

If everyone can start a micro-bank, you don't care if Paypal blocks you.

The fact that paypal can harm someone by terminating their account means the existing environment is non-competitive.

I was against most of the bans, but I don't like government interfering too much. As the real danger would be governments deciding that certain accounts should be banned. And in many cases government supported pressure groups are already involved in those bans

If we look at the truckers convoy in Canada, the government in power can just call the protesters terrorists and then what does PayPal do?

They should not steal the funds of those accounts; They should possibly pay compensation to the account holders they block

The best solution is the appearance of new apps aligned differently politically. For example YouTube is slowly destroying their monopoly by banning videos, people now immediately double upload into 2 or more platforms, making other platforms popular, Bitchute, Odyssey, Rumble, Newtube, Peertube...

“When intelligent people affiliate themselves to ideology, their intellect ceases to guard against wishful thinking, and instead begins to fortify it, causing them to inadvertently mastermind their own delusion, and to very cleverly become stupid.” — Gurwinder Bhogal

This sounds like a story I've heard several times in Germany. It goes like this: ① Someone like that Free Speech Union does something that is perhaps forbidden for you and me, but they're doing it for noble political reasons and somehow avoid prosecution. ② Someone else pushes through a rule change, either to allow the forbidden thing when done for political reasons, or to prevent it being done by e.g. blocking funding to related organisations.

This is where the Telegraph is now. The next step, not anticipated by the Telegraph: ③ People of the wrong political shade leverage the rule change to effect exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Paypal should be banned from holding money.

Without Paywall: https://archive.ph/LvblX