5 ms·
You're adopting a very dismissive tone for what seems like a reasonable position. If you believe Trump is uniquely dangerous (disclosure: I do), why couldn't yo
by SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
You're adopting a very dismissive tone for what seems like a reasonable position. If you believe Trump is uniquely dangerous (disclosure: I do), why couldn't you have a reasoned, objective belief that social media companies need the tools to keep him off their platform? If someone comes to me with an undisputable argument that suchandsuch principle means he has to be allowed on Facebook again, I consider that to be an argument against the principle, in much the same way as I'd reject a principle that proves we can't enforce laws or can't block spam.
- Andrew_nenakhov 6y agoSocial media companies have every right to ban Trump just because they can. But they should be honest about it: he is their political enemy and they don't want him to spread his message. Instead, they engage in an elaborate hypocrisy, inventing rules and procedures that are only applied to him and are only used to silence him. It is clear as a day that they don't apply the same standards to other politicians, especially their allies. And to me, few things are as disgusting as such hypocrisy. Shameless bias in reporting (to either side, while pretending to be 'objective') comes close, but not quite.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoBut I don't think that actually is an honest statement of their motives. Many of Facebook's political enemies have active Facebook accounts, and use them to spread messages Facebook doesn't agree with.
- throwawaysea 6y agoBut those other political enemies aren't in the same position of power as Trump. It could be argued that Facebook's motivations are to ensure the presidency and congress are under their political tribe's control while giving the maximal voice to the other side so that they do not lose all those customers who disagree with their political views. It gives them all the benefits of aggregating power for their political tribe while minimizing loss in income and corporate value.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoI don't really know how to engage with a claim like this. You could argue a lot of things - but are they true? It seems extraordinarily unlikely to me that Facebook would have banned a President Marco Rubio or President Ted Cruz.
- Covzire 6y agoWhy do you believe Trump is dangerous? CNN did nothing but lie about him and give endless coverage to rampant speculation. Literally everywhere there was any doubt, they brought on "experts" to exploit doubt and never gave Trump the benefit of any of it. The "emporer has no clothes" moment for me was when after a dozen or so appearances by Adam Schiff on CNN, MSNBC etc that he had seen proof that Trump was a russian asset, he presented zero evidence during the early 2020 impeachment trial. There are a lot of liars in politics and I wish more people would admit their side has their fair share of them.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y agoThe reason I believe Trump is dangerous is that, after he lost an election, he started making constant public demands for the results to be nullified, interspersed with occasional declarations that he had definitively won the election and intended to remain in power. I agree that many prior criticisms of him were speculative or untrue, but it seems clear that he was prepared to install himself for a second term by any means available.