What regressive "marketplace of ideas/freeze speech!" dumbasses like ContraPoints and Greenwald don't get is that when it comes to deplatforming & the information war, antifascists are in a four-way fight against 1) fascists and bigots 2) the social media companies 3) the state.

It should be obvious that deplatforming fascists doesn't fuel social media censorship against the left, because they'd censor the left regardless. In fact, the practice of deplatforming fascists points out the structural and profit-motivated biases of social media moderation—

—which helps diagnose exactly WHY social media moderation is so fucked up and points to ways in which it could be better. This is not just about "tweaking the algorithm": we can't really fix the rot until the monopolies are broken up and social media is actually... socialized.

Tulsi Gabbard agrees with Trump about repealing Section 230 because she wants to make it impossible to criticize the powerful, so people aren't allowed to point out her fucked-up cult background. Supporting the repeal of Section 230 would give a lot of power to the state—

—and while wielding the state's laws against the companies can be a good tactic, just like wielding these companies' social media services against the state can be a good tactic (in fact we do BOTH every day), ultimately repealing 230 would unbalance the situation way too much.

And giving the state too much power over social media would also give state-supported fascists and bigots too much power. So it would ultimately help two enemies while hurting a third.

Conservatives see only a two-sided fight of powerful individuals vs. social media companies: libertarians like Greenwald see only a two-sided fight of state vs. powerful individuals. We have to keep more sides in mind and focus on how to get our less powerful voices stronger.

Repealing Section 230 is a bad idea, not because it's using the state to attack social media (nothing wrong with that in principle, because social media companies are too powerful to attack otherwise) it's a bad idea because it would hurt/silence less powerful voices as well.

That's it for the thread. But if you're not convinced, I'd suggest reading this article about what happened when FOSTA-SESTA carved sex work out of Section 230, and consider what the consequences would be of carving everything out. https://www.bitchmedia.org/article/fosta-sesta-throws-sex-workers-into-fire