Just ban it and don't let it back, lets be done with this.
Everyone in my neighborhood, every single neighbor, speaks different languages, has different cultural origins and most are of different races. We don't support the same candidates or policy positions but we do all support and look out for each other.
I guess my point is, politeness even when there are significant disagreements is possible. We need to analyze the communications that do and don't work, find the similarities and patterns and encourage the beneficial ones while discouraging the negative ones.
Is there any reasoning for thinking this? Besides that, discussion cannot fix harms created by previous discussion - it can only (maybe) prevent future harms.
Parler heavily moderates away any non-right-wing content. There was never "both sides" on Parler. If it's actively being used to plan and execute acts of violence (arguably terrorism, given the death, bombs, and more that we've seen this week), how does keeping Parler around bring anyone together?
1. what is a non-racist person supposed to say to a racist person to change their views?
2. why is it the non-racist person's responsibility to talk to the racist person? in the words of office space, "why should I change? he's the one who sucks."
Racists do exist in considerable numbers and post prolifically online, so what should non-racists say to people like that?
Similar victories have been achieved with respect to drug legalization and "gay marriage".
None of these victories are or ever will be complete but a combination of discussion and social pressure did make significant social progress possible.
Please put a little more fucking thought into this than "why don't we just get rid of them, then they'll go away".
Completely aside from the morality of it, giving into that urge is exactly how we got here, and exactly how this spirals much, MUCH further out of control.