I’m struck by the complaint about loosening moderation, right next to a complaint about censorship. It’s a very unprincipled take from an org I used to respect.
They've always been about protecting privacy and liberty, just not the liberty to bully and harass people.
I agree that the American political parties currently represent rather niche positions that most people don't feel aligned with - they're pretty poor generalist labels for the various constellations of moral sentiments that we find in society.
It also seems like big tech is aging into or adopting a kind of partisanship. These companies are so unfathomably large it’s almost difficult to look at their market impact as positive. Mind you, I’m not trying to make a particular case here. I’m only espousing a general attitude. The share of the S&P 500 that they collectively occupy alone is looking increasingly concerning.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/consumer-protection/fil...
Also, saying the EFF is nonpartisan? The EFF always had a strong political point of view. If you label it right or left, that's your problem.
I definitely feel like the ACLU took a turn for the worse in that direction a few years ago. I'll be sad if the EFF is also headed that direction - they've struck me as one of the only ones that's still willing to stand on principle
Further, defending privacy and free speech also means protecting from people/institutions which would act against privacy and free speech, i.e. the "paradox of tolerance" is very relevant: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance