If society may be destabilized because one has the knowhow to create something of this scale but not the resources to properly moderate specific violent threats then perhaps a barrier-to-entry preventing that is a good thing

Powerful people funded Parler and promoted it publicly, and they specifically marketed it to people who create this type of ToS violation.

It's safe to say few other companies have scaled through that mechanism and simultaneously targeted hard-to-moderate audiences.

Evidence suggests the site was actively moderated. They actively encourage, organized, an participated in the forming radical cells, their plans, and execution. Its purpose was to attack our democracy. To replace it with something lacking the freedoms we take for granted every day.

They should be federally investigated on these grounds. Don't act like it was some innocent people putting together a social media site just because it wasn't allowed to bear fruit.

Your argument is week. I don't think any startups on here are activity trying to destabilize the American government in favor of racist authoritarians? That is pretty fucking high bar to qualify for.

And why doesn't everyone at Amazon get a say in how there work is used in the world? Should we actively work for people and causes that go against our beliefs?

It is a simple matter. They are such assholes no one with a brain is wants to help them. And thankfully, they are allowed to refuse them service over because of their actions.

And finally, freedom of speech? Really? Have you ever seen content policies? Or do disagree with those as well? And any moderation (although like I said above the site was actively moderated to conform to particular content and social graphs).