I think that would be fine as an initial reason. Having had that back in Dec, you'd think they would put SWP on a safe list? Who knows, I guess. And that's the problem, not so much the taking down as the taking down with zero reason or discussion...
Are their some good examples of censorship from before the last 2 weeks I can cite?
It might help a more friendly discussion too, people are already down voting randomly it seems...
I remember when Joe Rogan went to Spotify and there was something of a backlash inside the company. I vaguely remember some of his episodes (discussing trans athletes rights) weren't hosted for a while.
Put another way--let's not turn sedition into another us-vs-them political game. That's how democracy ends.
ETA: to quantify that a bit, in the 2010 General Election the SWP ran as part of the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition. Nationally that coalition received 0.04% of votes cast. I can't find any indication that they even put up any candidates in subsequent elections.
Acting like a reaction to a politically charged breach of the capitol building is equivalent to a page sharing views about COVID and workers rights getting removed?
It actually feels absurd to type that sentence out...
Although I can't see anything in throwaways885's comment to suggest that they were talking about the post-Capitol-breach purges. If anything, "for a while" suggests the opposite.
And my point is it's not really a "significant misapprehension" at all, at least not significant to their point.
They could be a party of one guy in his underwear and the point would still stand
As a general takeaway, "It actually feels absurd to type that sentence out..." can be a useful warning sign that you're projecting an absurd interpretation onto a reasonable statement instead of applying the Principle of Charity.
-
The deplatforming thing that ramped up in 2018 has overwhelmingly been about things like white-supremacy and neo-nazis... so it hit the alt-right very hard.
This is like conservative politicians complaining their followers are being deplatformed when Twitter decides to take a harder stance against white supremacy in the wake of an attack on our capitol which featured the alt-right/ neo-Confederates/ neo-Nazis... you're not confirming what you think you're confirming.
The conservatives is not being targeted per se, but it just so happens a lot of neo-nazis are conservatives. Take it as you will.
-
They're also ignoring the fact the "deplatforming thing" has recently kicked into high gear because of a certain set of events
This would be like someone from the Branch Davidians saying "We've always felt persecuted" in March 1993.. there were, but also a little thing happened with 4 ATF agents the month before!
That's the point being brought up, those events are very relevant if you're talking about deplatforming today. You don't brush such a major occurrence under the rug if you're arguing in good faith.
-
Even them saying it ramped up in "around 2018" is disingenuous. It ramped up with Trump and his actions.
And there was as a lot of gnashing of teeth over if that was right, if Trump was actually building a hateful support base or if this was just political lynching...
And then the Capitol breach occurred and removed all doubt and now we see it accelerating.
-
Also you read the sibling comment, you should have realized it makes the last part of your comment complete non-sequitur... sometimes it's a useful sign the argument being made just lacking self-awareness
I defended Parler in another thread and I'll defend the SWP here, despite not particularly liking either group.
And you're insulting me and black people everywhere trying to create equivalence between Parler being deplatformed for deciding to not moderate hate speech insofar as it didn't amount to a civil tort... and the systematic oppression of black people based on their skin color.
It's disgusting you'd stoop so low to try that.
I don't approve of calls for violence and I thought Facebook etc were doing well at free speech until the last year or two. It seems like no one is happy with that anymore.
The "favourable media attention" you are talking about is here the Socialist Workers' Party reporting about itself on its own website.
I'd wager the BBC will not cover this at all, in contrast to acres of free promotion for Parler etc.
See: how Farage was treated by the BCC, versus Corbyn
Related: https://www.lse.ac.uk/media-and-communications/research/rese...