Even if people on the right deserve to be banned more often (I don’t concede this but for arguments sake) they could still be getting banned too much. You are saying basically that conservatives are being banned from social media because they are making hateful and nasty comments but they are too hateful and nasty to realize this.
I never argued that conservatives are nasty. The point I was making is that the nasty and hateful things getting many on the political right banned is not conservatism. My criticism of conservatives is the conflation of those two things in order to claim that they are somehow being victimized by the left, so your quote demonstrates the entire point of this thread.
Whether conservatives are being banned unfairly is a legitimate concern and discussion, if that’s the conversation we were having then I would have no reason to post this.
This is what makes me roll my eyes whenever Democrats say there is no voter fraud. Yes there is, and in the last verified instance of it you were the victims! I think what you and people who think the same as you tend to miss is that power always uses unpopular edge cases to roll things out at first. They to be make for banning discussion on election fraud in 2020 because the evidence simply does not show widespread voter fraud. But what if, in a future election, there really IS voter fraud?
When Democrats say there was no voter fraud they’re not being literal. You’re attacking a strawman. Democrats just get tired sometimes of having to include the word “widespread” in that sentence because they shouldn’t have to, it should be common sense that this is what they mean, especially after months of public debate.
The idea that they are banning discussion about voter fraud is nonsense and another example of conflating things that are entirely different. What democrats are saying is that if you are going to claim there was voter fraud then the burden is on you to provide evidence of your claim, and in the absence of evidence not only is there is no reason for anyone to take your claim seriously but it is irresponsible for anyone to give you a platform to spread your unfounded nonsense.
This is not unique to election fraud or the political right, this is how society has always worked. Would you support CNN booking Alex Jones so he can explain to the world why he believes Sandy Hook was a government hoax and that all the parents pretending to be grieving the loss of their children are really just actors? We both know the answer. The burden of proof is a real thing and it applies here just like anywhere else.
One of the good things about a democratic society is that everyone, even the people who have no social or economic power, get to speak their minds.
I think my previous comment about the burden of proof addresses this somewhat, as well as what I said to Wylted in post 23 (first two paragraphs). Feel free to respond to it.
My final point in this wall of text: realize that the elites in this country aren’t really your friend.
This is one of those types of comments I hear on the right all the time and it just makes me scratch my head. It’s also central to my point in this thread.
No one I am aware of supports what is happening out of some notion that those who are in control of what’s happening are friends of the left. If that’s how you see this then you are completely missing the entire public conversation… which is exactly what I was describing in the OP. To see things this way requires one to view all of this as, like I already describe, as a team sport. This isn’t about team or sides, it’s about what is right and what is wrong.
