> You shouldn't let rule of law break down. Media and the judiciary should remain impartial and not push an agenda What are you calling a breakdown of the rule

> You shouldn't let rule of law break down. Media and the judiciary should remain impartial and not push an agenda What are you calling a breakdown of the rule of law here? Which law is supposed to decide who Facebook is required republish? What are you calling the media here? In this case people are writing their own content, and the folks being deplatformed definitely and unapologetically had an agenda. What would impartial possibly mean? We are talking about publication of opinions, not journalism or science. As for being "exposed and argued down", there will always be folks who won't stop an atrocious argument. They didn't sign up for a productive synthesis of ideas, and nobody else signed up for their boorishness and abuse, so it's up to the listener to walk away - as these platforms are doing. That's not suppression of expression, it's standing up for the value of your own time and community. If there is a backlash, maybe it will be more constructive than the original trolling was.