Small buisness should. A small buisness should have the right to turn down a customer because its against their religion or creed.
However, once a buisness becomes international, once it becomes a board and something bigger than itself, it should become a public entity with certain obligations to service constitutional rights, not recive them.
Example:
Facebook claims Floridas new law censors their right to free speech, because Facebook sees itself as having the rights of a person. It doesnt, it shouldnt.
Walmart shouldn't have the right to turn away people who haven't been vaccinated.
Could a mom and pop shop? Sure. Its their right.
Yet some places would starve without access to mega corporate shoping centers. If Walmart, Target, and dollar stores banned together to deny service to a demographic, that would be catestrophic.
Idk. Im uncertain on how the law actually works, its just an observation I felt like sharing.
Well, the truth is, that if I as an individual have free speech rights, then me grouping together with other individuals, that doesn't magically change the fact that we have free speech rights. But right now, the corporate world is massively distorted.
First, the tech industry have jumped in bed with the government. They are literally acting as an enforcement branch of the federal government for political quid-pro-quo. So this isn't just about corporations doing as they please with their property. When they do it while effectively acting as an enforcement branch of the government, they are violating peoples rights.
Second, in order to finance the federal government the US central bank has been keeping interest rates extremely abnormally low. But the thing is, those same interest rates have a tendency to create market bubbles. A lot of executives have been making extreme wealth from these low interest rates financing stock buybacks. Many corporations no longer have to provide much value to the market to get extreme wealth from their stocks, so they have lost all sense of market accountability. Zombie companies are able to linger along, by constantly refinancing at low interest rates. In a normal world, they would go under and their capital assets would be freed up to be used for more productive purposes.
It's not a coincidence that social unrest has been slowly but steadily growing, ever since the 2008 bailout. The market is not just about profit, but also a mechanism for clearing out unproductive activity. When you constantly bail it out, and unproductive activities can not be cleared by market means, then they it tends to grow out of control until the entire system becomes unstable and collapses.
Correct - you still have free speech rights (on your own property) no matter who you associate with. The entity that you've grouped together under is a legal fiction at best. It doesn't get duplicate rights.
In an ideal AnCap world corporations as we know them, with the problems you describe, wouldn't exist. There would be large companies and technically there could be stock corporations, but people would really need to trust the organizations they are chartered with before they invest. Obviously there wouldn't be any government subsidies or regulations beyond your contract with the company.
If you loan your friend $1000, and he uses that to buy a gun and shoot somebody, does that make you liable? No, of course not. Even in a pure libertarian society, there is still a lot of liability protection for people who buy shares, bonds, or invest in a company, who would have no reason to believe that the company would violate the freedom and property rights of others.
You're right I was simplifying a bit for the example. AnCap courts necessarily have to determine liability (it's a fundamental aspect of replacing State), and would still find legal fictions like "corporate personhood" a useful tool for assigning responsibility.