We live in an age of private companies owning the infrastructure facilitating daily life. For instance:<p>1. Communications infrastructure: FB, Twitter, private sites hosted on big cloud vendors<p>2. Payments: Stripe, Braintree, ...<p>3. Cloud: Google, AWS, MSFT-Azure, ...<p>4. Transportation: Uber, Lyft, ...<p>5. Domain registration, hosting: GoDaddy, Google, AWS, ...<p>Imagine running a real business while being banned from the aforementioned platforms --> It's unfeasible!!!<p>Never ever in history have companies from the valley held outsized control over private communication and business. With this power comes great responsibility - one of which is tolerance for an opposing political thoughts. If these "infrastructure" companies start making it unfeasible for those with differing politics to exist online, they'll immediately draw regulatory ire. Not to mention that systemic censorship of certain thought is unethical.<p>If AWS employees disagree with Palantair & ICE, they should consider other channels of expression - from social media to pressuring their elected representatives to call for change. But, if Palantair isn't engaged in illegal activity, they should be sent to an orientation in tolerance for opposing political philosophies.