Last week, Facebook and Instagram officially banned Alex Jones, Infowars, Paul Joseph Watson, Milo Yiannopoulos, Laura Loomer, and Louis Farrakhan. Not only are these individuals restricted from using the sites, but even current, authorized users are forbidden from sharing their work, lest they be banned as well. It is the most Orwellian overreach that everyone knew was eventually coming… which is why conservatives shouldn’t feign outrage.
We have known for a long time that this was going to happen. Thanks to the excellent undercover work at Project Veritas, we have long been aware of the shadow banning and deceptive algorithms developed in Silicon Valley to censor conservatives. Simultaneously, we have been witnessing the slow and hilarious painful death of the Democratic party. Every bombshell report to crucify President Trump has failed miserably, the Mueller report proved nothing, and the economy is doing great. Leftists cannot make a coherent argument that doesn’t involve physical violence and the party has been reduced to promising terrorists the right to vote and infanticide. It has truly been a pleasure watching them descend into the bowels of lunacy. Naturally, the IT California communists were going to have to massively intervene to save these morons from hanging themselves.
But now conservatives are demanding government intervention on the grounds of violations of free speech. Any conservative who thinks the government will save us from Silicon Valley is just as foolish as the Bernie Bro who thinks the government will deliver superlative health care. The government will not save us. We have to save ourselves.
First and foremost, there is a debate as to whether a legal basis exists to regulate social media platforms. This is dependent upon whether these sites are designated as platforms or publishers. If social media is a platform, that means they are not responsible for the content created by users on their site. It’s the same as Verizon Wireless not being responsible for what you say on their telephone line. As a publisher though, if something is published on the site that is libelous or a copyrighted, then the publisher can be sued. However, this only applies to information released specifically by the publisher, not a third party using the site like for example a commenter. If the Times posts an article with factual information (a rare occurrence) but a commenter posts something nasty or defamatory in relation to the article, the Times is not responsible. One legal argument is that that standard changes once the entity starts removing commenters/users. If the platform starts removing posts or denying service not based on clearly articulated standard, then the platform is now acting more like a publisher and could be subject to legislation.
I don’t find this a particularly strong argument though because any business anywhere in the United States is allowed to refuse service to anyone for any reason (except if you are a Christian bakery). You don’t have a constitutional right to Facebook. Perhaps another legal recourse is to mandate terms of service be more clearly defined in which case these sites could just be honest and refuse to host conservative users, which is their right.
Even if there were some other legislative path forward, how can anyone on the right trust that the Republicans in Congress will follow through? They failed to deliver on the wall, they failed to kill Obama Care after years of promising to, they can’t curtail spending or reduce the debt. They can’t even defund Planned Parenthood and now we are supposed to have faith they will protect us from Big Tech. Republicans couldn’t pour piss out of a boot if the directions were written on the heel.
Furthermore, any legislation passed to preserve our presence on the progressive owned social media sites will be immediately in jeopardy once a President AOC and her comrades get into power. We would only be buying time.
Our only option is to build our own platforms and thankfully we have already won this battle before. Conservatives dominate talk radio and YouTube, despite attempts to silence us too. We have to persevere and recreate the success of our conservative elders like Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin. Luckily, social networks committed to the free and open exchange of ideas already exist like Gab, Dissenter, Minds, and BitChute. We might as well flee now.
This won’t minimize the huge obstacles we will still face. Leftists will still sabotage our efforts by targeting advertisers, payment processors, and refusing new platforms access to the app store. One thing we can rely on though is the left’s assurance to eat their own. They can convince PayPal now to not do business with certain conservative thinkers. But eventually they’ll turn on the corporations themselves citing the mythical wage gap or because these businesses don’t have enough black, transgender Muslims on their board of directors. Let the economic balkanization commence and watch those who bend the knee to the left suffer. Progressivism is not good for business. Just look at the down vote ratios for the Gillette ad and Pantene’s new She Search Engine ad.
Many on the right don’t seem as concerned with this new social media standard and even celebrated the removal of Alex Jones and others. “They can’t ban all of us” they say. Actually, they can and they will attempt to do so until every person to the right of Chairman Mao is offline.
Make no mistake, this is only the first round of the conservative online purge and the subsequent guilty by association change in the terms of service is a substantial escalation in the ideological war. It will get considerably worse from here. My bet is that they now go after lesser known conservatives before they accelerate again and take out some big key players. They might even go after some very intelligent, well-travelled, articulate bloggers who know how to argue… which is why you should definitely put your email into that subscription box to the right of the page.