5975
Comments (174)
sorted by:
158
sgtmattkind 158 points ago +160 / -2

FUCK Zuck

28
Chopblock 28 points ago +37 / -9

I can name a couple right off the top of my head — here’s one:

World Socialists Website - because Real Old-School Socialists don’t like the neomarxist intelligence agency devil-worshippers any more than we do.

‘Classic’ Liberals who go against the ‘mainstream’ have been censored alongside conservatives. RINOs, of course, get a pass — even proven liars and bogeymen like W.

5
PurestEvil 5 points ago +5 / -0

Well, "Liberal" != leftist. In fact, the left today is not liberal at all. "Liberal" is an euphemism for what they truly are: Marxists.

The question was about liberals (in comparison to conservatives), so the socialists do technically not count.

3
Chopblock 3 points ago +3 / -0

Okay, here’s another example: Ted Rall, an anti-war Lettie and syndicated columnist and cartoonist who dared speak against the war machine and 9-11. He was fired from his newspaper, smeared, and his content was an early contender for being de-ranked and continually blocked by ‘errors’.

4
sun_wolf 4 points ago +4 / -0

Was World Socialists Website high-profile or more niche?

7
cluckingducks 7 points ago +7 / -0

Never heard of them. I HAVE heard of the NY Post.

1
Chopblock 1 point ago +1 / -0

Probably more niche in the big scheme of things, but certainly a prominent voice.

2
somethinga9230k 2 points ago +3 / -1

World Socialists Website - because Real Old-School Socialists don’t like the neomarxist intelligence agency devil-worshippers any more than we do.

That sounds incredibly off, for the fully intentional planned and organized genocides upon genocides upon genocides upon genocides in the very many tens of millions that communists have committed for over a hundred years does not indicate that "Real Old-School Socialists" are not extreme evil or more evil than that. And these communists were also very much about dissolving and destroying existing culture, ways, etc. etc. etc., both through genocide as well as other more indirect means. And they also had child rapists and the like in their core ranks, just as today. Of course, when some of these communists realized that they had weakened their captured countries too much to wage war and conquer more countries to spread communism and continue destroying everything, they sometimes temporarily scaled back and slowed down some of their horrifying evils.

Unless of course these "Real Old-School Socialists" think that the more obvious communists and the like are being too obvious and blatant and/or they are more on the "useful idiot" side of things.

2
Chopblock 2 points ago +2 / -0 (edited)

To be clear, I’m not saying their ideology is a good one. But there are many misguided people with good intentions, be they BernieBros, ‘Labor’ Democrats, Televangelist followers, even ‘Chickenhawks’and RINOs. By ‘old-school’ I’m speaking of those American labor socialists who never actually got a real taste of it, not true believers, people who lived under socialist rule, or even the sophomore socialists that increasingly crowd colleges.

Misguided as they be, they still didn’t like their principled socialism being hijacked by the neoliberals, and besides, many socialists have an ability to discern and identify problems in the world as a consequence of using a disciplined analytical approach (they just offer up a bad solution). They are also often quite dogged in raising the issues.

These attributes make them dangerous to corporate organized tyrants, and they were censored, delisted, and suppressed along with everyone else who threatened their control.

1
somethinga9230k 1 point ago +2 / -1

But there are many misguided people with good intentions, be they BernieBros, ‘Labor’ Democrats, Televangelist followers, even ‘Chickenhawks’and RINOs. By ‘old-school’ I’m speaking of those American labor socialists who never actually got a real taste of it, not true believers, people who lived under socialist rule, or even the sophomore socialists that increasingly crowd colleges.

The "useful idiots"? While it is true that there are a considerable proportion of them that are useful idiots, many of them are genuine communists and know fully well that they are horrifyingly extremely evil.

[...] many socialists have an ability to discern and identify problems in the world as a consequence of using a disciplined analytical approach (they just offer up a bad solution). They are also often quite dogged in raising the issues.

........

Are you the slightest bit sincere in any way whatsoever? And what you write about sound much more like controlled opposition than anything sincere, genuine and meaningful (apart from the useful idiots).

These attributes make them dangerous to corporate organized tyrants, and they were censored, delisted, and suppressed along with everyone else who threatened their control.

This sounds incredibly much like controlled opposition, which makes things much, much, much less dangerous to the other sides of the communists and those they are allied with. The same "left" that scream about Trump and wanting him to wage war and stay in Iraq and Afghanistan and completely ignore his successes (with extra focus on successes, not just "initiatives") such as in North Korea, Middle East, etc.? And you even move focus over to "corporate organized tyrants" instead of the deep state corporations.

And somehow, you succeed in distracting greatly from the fully intentional, planned and organized genocides upon genocides upon genocides upon genocides in the very many tens of millions that communists have committed for over a hundred years.

Would you be able to list at least 3 genocides committed by the (early) Soviet Union?

1
Chopblock 1 point ago +1 / -0 (edited)

You seem to have diverged from the original discussion of tech censorship into the false assumption that I am mounting some defense of Socialism, when I am merely pointing out that the type of socialists that were most likely to go against the neoliberal globalist’s narrative were also silenced.

Useful Idiots is an apt term, but sincerity demands acknowledgment of an enemy’s strengths and weaknesses. Applying any disciplined approach (which can be done with Marxist ‘economic’ theory, or Marx’s ‘class-struggle’ and ‘revolution blueprint’ ideas, wrongheaded as they are) can yield insights even if the approach is ultimately flawed (just as other flawed models of religion and science proved sufficiently useful for various tasks throughout history).

This is why so many otherwise bright people fall into socialism’s trap, and why people like Bernie and Sandy Cortez can sway people: they accurately identify problems that people have encountered themselves, and are able to offer realistic-sounding reasons for those problems (and offer a ‘fix-all’ solution), while many conservatives refuse to acknowledge the existence of the problem or try to hand-wave it away (examples: College debt, Medical bankruptcy - both actually trace back to socialist-style government market intervention, but one rarely hears those arguments from conservatives, who instead seem to ‘blame the victim’; meanwhile Bernie can talk about it all day in a relatable way that ‘rings true’, even though his blather is a stack of lies).

Socialists are generally quite good at identifying symptoms, they just misdiagnose the disease and kill the patient with their treatment.

And yes, I am well-aware that mass starvation, war, environmental destruction, corruption, and genocide follow socialism (and its communist bedfellow) wherever it goes, like fleas on a mongrel dog.

“Corporate organized tyrants" is analogous to “deep state corporations”, but where the latter term implies that the entity is seeded or funded with taxpayer money, the former need not necessarily be so. I emphasize corporate organization because it flies in the face of most socialist’s preferences in a way that government-created entities don’t, which highlights the difference between neoliberalism and socialism in terms of hypocrisy.

Maybe a better example for you is the antivaxxers, many of who are ‘hippie’ type leftists, who published against vaccines on sites like naturalnews. They were also purged from the social media sphere, smeared, and ‘cancelled’.

Whether they are generally right about vaccines, or specifically correct in their arguments, is immaterial to the fact that they challenged the big tech overlords’ preferred narrative at the time, and thus got the censor boot (that the narrative was quickly flipped recently against ‘Trump’s vaccines’ is illustrative of how detached the censors are to any version of truth).

TLDR: I’m happy to hold them in place for you to kick out of the helicopter

0
somethinga9230k 0 points ago +1 / -1

So you are beyond any doubt a communist shill, and you lie, deceive, manipulate, distract, misrepresent, attack strawmen, etc. etc. etc. to the extreme, and you know that well. You are not sincere in any way whatsoever.

See also https://thedonald.win/p/11PVyU96Rz/x/c/19Ba8LaxN9 where you wrote:

World Socialists Website - because Real Old-School Socialists don’t like the neomarxist intelligence agency devil-worshippers any more than we do.

And in https://thedonald.win/p/11PVyU96Rz/x/c/19Bst0ZSRm where you wrote:

[...] many socialists have an ability to discern and identify problems in the world as a consequence of using a disciplined analytical approach (they just offer up a bad solution). They are also often quite dogged in raising the issues.

.

[...] they accurately identify problems that people have encountered themselves, [...]

And this is an absolutely incredibly extreme lie (and distraction), for they misidentify and misrepresent how things are 100% intentionally. And you know that well, communist shill. And you continue with distracting from the useful idiots as well as the various kinds of fully intentionally incredibly evil controlled opposition, such as the core and controllers of the "hippies" that on purpose work incredibly ineffectively against war right up until they begin calling for war once Trump succeeds in achieving peace.

And again: And somehow, you succeed in distracting greatly from and diminishing extremely the fully intentional, planned and organized genocides upon genocides upon genocides upon genocides in the very many tens of millions that communists have committed for over a hundred years.

Would you be able to list at least 3 genocides committed by the (early) Soviet Union?

1
Chopblock 1 point ago +1 / -0

It’s kind of hilarious that you accuse me of shilling, when your argument rests on repetitive accusative name-calling, simplistic dichotomies, rigid hysterical enforcement of your own dogmatic viewpoint, and contextless hyperfocus on off-topics that distract from the subject issue under discussion — the same rhetorical mindset used by the revolutionary true believers!

Nobody is arguing that socialism isn’t a destructive ideology. You’re tilting at windmills and strawmen.

18
avrillavigne 18 points ago +19 / -1

Not sure if 230 will ever be overturned but in the meantime, Trump needs to post to Gab (and other non-censoring platforms) like 10 minutes before he posts to Twitter and Facebook. Want to be the first to know? Then go to Gab, etc. This would be probably the best way to get people to get off the censoring platforms.

11
sun_wolf 11 points ago +12 / -1

Then when Gab gets popular the six corporations that own the media will buy it up and it’s back to Twitter again.

I think the free market solution does not work here. This is monopolistic behavior and there are laws against that for a reason. As free market capitalists we do not have to expect free market capitalism to solve a monopoly problem. That is a valid place for government and law enforcement to enforce some rules.

4
dizzle_izzle 4 points ago +4 / -0

Omfg that is absolutely genius

11
Carry_Your_Name 11 points ago +12 / -1

Suck a burger

8
HockeyMom4Trump 8 points ago +9 / -1

Stay off Facebook and Instagram. Overall, the are just time suckers. No one needs to see pictures of someone’s cat

4
orange_dit 4 points ago +4 / -0

Smack Jack

127
socrates2 127 points ago +129 / -2

The main issue as I see it that the Politicians failed to bring up in questioning is this:

  1. What is your main form of business revenue..... answer: Advertising
  2. Do you do a good job for you clients... answer: Yes
  3. What does advertising do? Persuades
  4. Do you believe we rightly have campaign finance caps/laws in this country?
  5. Are you by giving out your product for free or for better quality to one candidate over another essentially making a campaign contribution?? Is the amount of help you are giving in violation of an entire host of campaign finance laws??

Forget the section 230 or whatever, that's obvious they are publishers, the real immediate crime is campaign finance violations.

The same could be said about every influencer out there. They charge businesses for endorsements and tweets - they advocate on their platforms politically they need to register those as in-kind campaign contributions. The same way a housing developer can't build a deck for a politician or other service for free.

24
joebidet 24 points ago +25 / -1

This is such a good reply.

20
DrBJTester 20 points ago +20 / -0

Exceptional comment pede.

6
CitizenPlain 6 points ago +8 / -2

Why not both?

4
Snerdley 4 points ago +4 / -0

I'm not sure what 230 changes could be made to ensure free speech on these platforms. It seems to me a guaranteed way to clamp down on all controversial or non-approved speech. It would hurt them, yes, but it wouldn't solve our censorship issue.

Going after them on campaign finance violations, yes! Break them to bits, yes! Heck, declare them the new public square and seize their platforms, (maybe) but declaring them a publisher will simply require all post/comments to be approved.

I'm open to other ideas of how this should work.

1
CantStumpTheTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not sure what 230 changes could be made to ensure free speech on these platforms.

Because then they have to either be held responsible for what they host or they stay out of it unless subpoenas get involved. Like the phone company and ISPs; it actually seems to work quite well when you don't get to have your cake and eat it too

3
Pomilui 3 points ago +3 / -0

The Federal Election Commission, the Federal Communications Commission, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation have ignored campaign finance laws for democrats for at least 60 years.

2
Notablitheringidiot 2 points ago +2 / -0

Found the lawyer.

And name checks out.

2
socrates2 2 points ago +2 / -0

Businessman actually but have dealt with lawyers before and you are right did attend a bit of law school.

I just couldnt believe that Twitter CEO actually said he doesnt believe his firm can impact an election. They are dam billion dollar ad firms....

64
RogueLeaderX 64 points ago +65 / -1

I'LL SAY THIS OVER AND OVER A MILLION TIMES UNTIL IT HAPPENS .........

BREAK UP BIG TECH!!!! ESPECIALLY SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORMS!!!!

14
marikiri 14 points ago +14 / -0

Social media and it's consequences have been a disaster for the human race

3
worldofsmut 3 points ago +4 / -1

I don't agree with this.

I see it smiliarly to firearms. Can be used for good (spreading democracy through dictatorships, democratising and decentralising journalism, allowing whistle-blowing) as well as evil. So social media might be terrible with respect to Trump but it's probably a good thing for citizens of shithole countries who can learn how their own leaders fucked them, rather than letting leaders blame it on other countries, Jews etc. they way they previously may have via tightly controlled media.

The Social Dillemma is excellent viewing and makes the point about how the original intentions for much of this tech simply went awry.

3
FuckReddit4545 3 points ago +4 / -1

Yeah no. As the last generation of Americans (heck Humans) that grew up without a mobile pinging device where every Tom Dick and Harry gets to spout fucking nonsense all day, I can assure you social media is and will continue to be a cancer on society. What we are living is NOT normal life. We should be engaged in our communities, having one on one conversations and interactions, and actually go outside to do stuff instead of being glued to a screen all day. The irony runs deep, I order shit on Amazon, I chat it up with you folks via a fucking screen, I get it. But damn was my childhood something I wouldn't trade for the world, and the current younger generations straight up didn't have what you (probably) or I did. We have to go back. No more cancelling people via twitter, no more shaming people on FB, no more virtual classrooms / parent teacher conferences. We need to get back to human to human interactions.

Ever notice how it's weird or odd to chat it up with strangers in public? Look at older folks, they can just go to a restaurant and leave with new friends. That was the only way of communication, you just said hello and got to talking. Now there has to be some grand reason just to have a conversation.

2
braveContrarian 2 points ago +2 / -0

i still do cold approaches on the street since im pm an exile, and most people do find it creepy or weird but idgaf.

honestly it really does keep people trapped in an influence bubble.

1
American_Cuban 1 point ago +1 / -0

I know the solution, lets make all students sit at home all day and force people to stand 6 feet away from each other.

2
Rickshawrick 2 points ago +2 / -0

Take a look at how China tracks it's "citizens"

3
jetjetjet 3 points ago +4 / -1

I don't think that just breaking up a company will change anything. If half your friends are on Facebook1, and the other half of your friends are on Facebook2, that simply doesn't work. One company will end up with all the friends over time.

What we need is an open standard. Like HTML. HTML works on windows, macs, linux, anything. It's because of HTML that the internet works at all. If one webpage only worked on windows and a different webpage only worked on blue 2013 macintoshes there's no way the internet would function.

If there was an open standard for social media companies, you could use Facebook2 while your friends used Facebook1 and still talk to each other. Something like this is the only way.

3
xopi 3 points ago +3 / -0

Insert xkcd standards comic here.

It won't work

2
jetjetjet 2 points ago +2 / -0

That comic is if there are too many standards.

Right now there aren't any at all.

Two different issues.

2
FormerGraveheart 2 points ago +2 / -0

Plus, xkcd sucks and is majorly cucked.

2
fauxgnaws 2 points ago +2 / -0

Repeal 230, then everybody has to self-host their social media (no company can afford the liability of hosting it themselves, and you're already liable for your own content).

An open standard will appear like magic because nobody's going to use a half dozen different apps to find out what their family and friends are up to.

1
ProudWhiteMan 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yep, honestly the only way would be to have like a .win system independent websites per person which can be mutually searched/indexed with some shareable content and a catered times line. Other than that it'll always be the bigger the better

1
jetjetjet 1 point ago +1 / -0

Yes, but in your browser it would all be one site. So there would be a thedonald one, and a gamergate one, and a reddit one for the mentally disabled. And somehow your browser or some website would put all of those together.

2
ProudWhiteMan 2 points ago +2 / -0

It won't work social media works on the basis o the bigger the better and that's what attracts people. Unless the government make their own there will always be a monopoly there.

45
KamalasCamelHump 45 points ago +47 / -2

Globalist collusion out in the open. Silence those who love what America is and amplify those who want to see her destroyed forever.

38
ObongoForPrison2020 38 points ago +40 / -2

Cuckerberg and Faggot Jack are going to hate the future.

33
Junkevil 33 points ago +34 / -1

That's so weird. Isn't that weird?

16
anon11111111 16 points ago +17 / -1

Yeah, it is really weird. I wonder what the reason could be? It's a mystery!

32
spratville 32 points ago +33 / -1

I wonder why they couldn't name anyone. Why would they only be censoring conservatives?

Maybe because they are part of the Communist Chinese takeover.

21
TheMemeSpiceMustFlow 21 points ago +21 / -0 (edited)

Name a single thing the cuck GOP has ever done to stop big tech censorship.

9
Carry_Your_Name 9 points ago +9 / -0

They are naive believers of free market. They think government should let businesses run by themselves with minimal regulation.

7
TheMemeSpiceMustFlow 7 points ago +8 / -1

But it's not free market currently. In a free market you are still responsible for your own content and criminally liable if that content is a crime (death threats, cp, etc). In a free market you would be held liable if you break your own terms of service, cant just break a content because you don't like someone's political opinion.

GPO doesn't believe in free market, they're just cucks.

5
Carry_Your_Name 5 points ago +5 / -0

Big tech was not used to behave like this. It all changed after "the biggest political upset" of Trump's miraculous win in 2016. Dems blamed that on big tech for their gross negligence to "Russian disinformation" and put their own staffers in those companies to "fix it". Now Big Tech has become another propaganda arm of the dems along with the fake news media. GOP, though, are mostly not aware of this at all. Some of them are too old to understand what these social platforms are, how they operate and how they profit.

4
Wtf_socialismreally 4 points ago +4 / -0

I can confirm for you that this was, in fact, the way they operated before Trump.

They have just turned it up to about a 12.

1
Carry_Your_Name 1 point ago +1 / -0

I knew they were targeting conservative voices back in the Obummer years, but not as blatant and intense as they are today. They might secretly shadowban and downrank people, but I honestly don't remember them straightforward deleting stuffs and fact checking you. On the other hand, the user base as a whole wasn't as divided as it is today, people with different political leanings could have raletively peaceful conversations, most criticisms against Obummer and Crooked H were allowed. Over the past few years, though, they have deliberately shifted the user base leftward with their damn algorithm. Not only do they target conservatives, but a lot of liberals and real journalists who share real news, while they let the leftist lunatics post whatever garbage they like. As a result the only people left are SWJ mob, and lamestream media take their tweets as genuine public opinion.

2
TheMemeSpiceMustFlow 2 points ago +2 / -0

Exactly. They've done enough to have been charged with numerous crimes years ago, the problem is no one holds them accountable. Trump has done more than anyone else to call them out, but even he hasn't done enough.

Trump is easily the most popular conservative president we've ever had, so if he doesn't beat the cheating dems, communist media, and thought police big tech then no conservative president ever will again.

3
MAGAMAN300 3 points ago +3 / -0

i have feeling we will finally get our wish pretty soon.

2
kebabdrogo 2 points ago +2 / -0

I have a feeling we have drastically different wishes.

2
MAGAMAN300 2 points ago +2 / -0

😂

2
BloodyBaron 2 points ago +2 / -0

Yeah it's fucking frustrating

18
mygovisacommie 18 points ago +18 / -0

Mark Zuckersperg and Jackoff Dorsey are a couple of butt fucking faggot traitors. Hang these pieces of shit and watch shit change over night.

5
deleted 5 points ago +5 / -0
14
GreatestAmericanEver 14 points ago +14 / -0

I'm just a simple guy, but it seems like an easy solution to all of this would be

A] Big Tech just shouldn't block anyone from posting whatever they want.

B] There shouldn't be any "report" features. Only "block". If you don't want to see something someone posted, block them. If there's something on TV that I don't want to watch, I just change the channel - I don't embark on some big campaign to make sure it never appears on tv again. Same with social media. Don't cry to your fucking tech mommy, just block what you don't want to see and move on.

10
deleted 10 points ago +10 / -0
2
RedJive 2 points ago +2 / -0

Eternal September. We're still living it

6
Carry_Your_Name 6 points ago +6 / -0

Nuh, the only solution is to break this cartel apart. They have a monopoly, and worse than any other kinds of monopoly, they have a monopoly over the flow of INFORMATION. It seems that their platforms are free and accessible, but you know what they say, when a service is free, YOU are the product. If they can't be broken, then find a way to diminish their influences, expose the truth that only a few of trolls and bots generating 90% contents, stop paying so much attention on the tweets from those blue check marks, and promote alternatives like Rumble and Parler.

4
Wtf_socialismreally 4 points ago +4 / -0

It's not a monopoly.

It's an oligopoly, which is harder to break up and has more staying power, and is also more destructive.

2
Carry_Your_Name 2 points ago +2 / -0

Well the way I see it, although they are collectively called Big Tech and they share the same marching order, they are intertwined monopolies with different specialties in different fields. You have a Twatter on microblog, Fakebook on social network, Instagross on photos, Goolag on search engine, Screwtube on videos. That's what I meant by monopoly. Dissolve any one of those would greatly weaken their power. It would make a good example for the rest of them.

2
CantStumpTheTrump 2 points ago +2 / -0

another simple solution; you want to do business in some place like Europe or china where their laws cause more restriction then ours then they can build their own European version of things with those rules and then their country can block the good version and let them and their citizens work out the details of why they can't have nice things...

Just because its illegal to call the head of china pooh bear over there doesn't mean those restrictions should apply everywhere, enough of this lowest common denominator dimwit bullshit.

I understand how cost savings work but these are also the people who are all about having everyone else pay their fair share and "do more"; so its win-win they will have to start by hiring a metric fuck ton of people to run multiple product lines. Too bad.

14
deleted 14 points ago +22 / -8
8
deleted 8 points ago +11 / -3
4
ShiffsDeadHooker 4 points ago +4 / -0

Plausible deniability.

1
ZionistDistractions 1 point ago +2 / -1

What's that now?

5
Westonian 5 points ago +5 / -0

I don't know what the hell you're talking about, Mark talks about big tech censorship all the time.

Sure, he isn't talking about it when there isn't a major instance of censorship, but that's literally all of us. But I listen to the guy every day. Almost every time GEOTUS' Tweets were flagged or removed, or even when it happens to his campaign's Twitter, Mark talks about it.

Fucking chill.

1
Carry_Your_Name 1 point ago +2 / -1

Why would he care when he has a popular podcast and a weekend program on FOX.

13
DJT_MFer 13 points ago +15 / -2

Lol surprised Jack didn't say

"Ed Kassenstein"

"But that Mrs Kassenstein is a great mom"

GFY Jack

7
johnbillaby 7 points ago +8 / -1

What'd those fags get banned for, that was like 2 years ago or something.

7
Scooby 7 points ago +7 / -0

It was shortly after they admitted to taking Soros money.

7
Slyhillary 7 points ago +11 / -4

Running bot operations.

https://variety.com/2019/digital/news/twitter-bans-ed-brian-krassenstein-brothers-fake-accounts-1203225266/

The plausible deniability is that it was them doing it.

More likely, they were sanctioned by Twitter execs and the visibility of clear manipulation got too intense. So they cut them off and blamed them for breaking rules.

6
soyface_deluxe 6 points ago +6 / -0

So they were banned for blatantly violating TOS. Not censored for their political views.

1
Slyhillary 1 point ago +5 / -4

Correct.

6
DJT_MFer 6 points ago +6 / -0

Being fags

9
Trump-45 9 points ago +9 / -0

Disband the companies!!!

9
IncredibleMrE1 9 points ago +9 / -0

H1B Mike Lee is a RINO NeverTrump loser, but sometimes he has his uses.

2
soyface_deluxe 2 points ago +2 / -0

What use? They're still out there doing what they're doing. All talk no action.

7
FUCK_DemonRATS 7 points ago +7 / -0

Fuckerburg and Whoresi need to be arrested for election interference.

6
JoeBidensLegHairs 6 points ago +6 / -0

We really showed them today. That stern talking to is gonna make them change in no time

3
BallisticMissile 3 points ago +3 / -0

Conservatives are too afraid to do anything.

We want to portray ourselves as virtuous when in reality we just capitulate to the Left.

4
ModsBanPaleos 4 points ago +5 / -1

glass san francisco

4
chopz 4 points ago +4 / -0

they probably simply choose not to recognize the word Censor. These people operate on a God complex.

4
deleted 4 points ago +4 / -0
3
TwoPlusTwoEqualsFour 3 points ago +3 / -0

TBF they couldn't name a constitutional minded person they've banned either because it's against their TOS.

3
MAGAMAN300 3 points ago +3 / -0

Mark... "Sure we censor liberals,"

Republcians " name one"

Mark " It was that guy, You know who I'm talking about!.. That guy who post the cat memes.. Yea that guy is an asshole had to ban him."

Republicans "😒

3
RiffFantastic 3 points ago +3 / -0

They can’t be fired. The rigged their little monopolies so that they’ll never be forced out. They sell shares that are worthless.

3
SacredBandOfPedes 3 points ago +3 / -0

How about a 4am swat team raid on Dorsey and Zuckerberg's house with OANN tipped off beforehand so we call all see them trotted out before the media cameras!

I mean they did lie to a federal agency.....the Congress of the United States....right? Oh...that's right...they're Democrats...nevermind....nothing to see here...

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

I am afraid a true destruction at minimum takes the heads, and the managers.

2
QueensOwn 2 points ago +2 / -0

The better argument is the fake, unverified Steele dossier which was openly discussed and shared on all platforms. We all know that even according to (dare I say the FBI) not a single accusation contained was EVER verified. FACT. Yet it was used to obtain a FISA warrant to spy on US citizens.

2
makemyday007 2 points ago +2 / -0

**** CHINA OWNS FACEBOOK, TWITTER AND REDDIT ****

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
1
Grond999 1 point ago +2 / -1

The RepubliCANTs can't cuck BOSSES like Zuck and Jack. They can only expose how toothless they are year after year. I would imagine they have a good laugh at the 'out of touch' party.

The RepubliCANT party desperately needs actual patriots who will fight for America.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
MagaroniNCheese 2 points ago +2 / -0

I love the "name just one" angle. I use it all the time with muh wage gap people, for example. I always say, please give an example of a single position at a single company that systematically pays women less than men, all other factors being equal. Just one! I have never had someone do it.

2
J3N93W 2 points ago +2 / -0

Hillary Clinton's campaign in 2016. That was my mother-in-law's redpill.

1
TJHWP 1 point ago +1 / -0

I could give four examples personal experience but it doesn't prove that its widespread, I'm not under american law, which I think is clearer, so there was absolutely no recourse, no way to prove it, and no one is required to disclose what people are paid anyway, so unless the guy paid more actually tells you you wouldn't know. (they did actually tell me in one instance, I was actually training him he thought it was a shocker) The other times were other people.

1
Wtf_socialismreally 1 point ago +1 / -0

Well, the true answer is that it's almost impossible for all factors to be equal depending on how far back they want to go for hiring you.

1
TJHWP 1 point ago +1 / -0

Nothing to do with the situation at all, it was a learn on the job kind of job. He had no prior experience at all. Like he said, it was a shocker.

2
Batman 2 points ago +2 / -0

Traditional execution is far too efficient for these guys. Change my mind.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
takemylife_letbe 2 points ago +2 / -0

Maximum sternness has been reached. Now do something.

2
DankoJones84 2 points ago +2 / -0

when you ask social media CEOs how many liberals they've censored

"We don't do that here."

2
Ithrowawaay 2 points ago +2 / -0

I uhhh will have to get back to you on that.

2
border_humper 2 points ago +2 / -0

Farrakhan? Sole example I can think of.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
0
deleted 0 points ago +1 / -1
1
pedeypete 1 point ago +1 / -0

Who is going to be the one useless liberal they're going to permaban just so they can claim to not be biased next time?

1
Wallllllllllllllllll 1 point ago +1 / -0

They haven't even thought about censoring a single person on the left, despite the widespread criticism of their ongoing and obvious censorship of the right. It's hubris. And they are totally oblivious to it.

1
KekistanPM 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm sure they're not concerned about it; they have yet to even get so much as a $100 fine.

1
JiveTurkey_1 1 point ago +1 / -0

Listening to Dorsey really infuriated me, saying the same shit he said in the Rogan interview with Tim Pool a few years ago.

I don't care about talk anymore, show some action GOP. Take 230 away from them.

1
ARFIFMEME 1 point ago +1 / -0

Because they're publishers.

1
runonce 1 point ago +1 / -0

Struggle? Just say CAN"T.

1
PosterIsDead 1 point ago +1 / -0

Wouldn't Borat be the obvious answer?

1
NonyaDB 1 point ago +1 / -0

Get fucked, Zuck. Get slapped, Jack.

1
downwithuppish 1 point ago +1 / -0

I miss MSN Messenger to be honest.

1
gary548 1 point ago +1 / -0

Biased and censored social media controlled by Deep State

1
xkgb 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's easy any liberal that walked away from the Democrat party and joined the Trump train.

1
SJBHamilton 1 point ago +1 / -0

Congress cannot fire them. The shareholders have to do it.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
ItsOKtoVoteTrump 1 point ago +1 / -0

the Krappenhammers

1
Westonian 1 point ago +1 / -0

I keep telling people this. The CEOs don't know shit. Watch the Joe Rogan podcast with Tim Pool, Vijaya Gadde, and Jack Dorsey. Vijaya is answering 90% of the questions because she was directly involved. Jack only knows about a handful of the more popular instances of censorship where he got involved because he had to. Other than these instances, the CEOs rarely hear about it when an account is suspended or a news story is being censored.

Talk to the policy leads if you want answers on WHY these stories are being censored. They'll surely give you a bullshit answer, but it will be considerably less bullshit than the answer the CEOs will give you. All interviewing the CEOs does is enable them to feign ignorance and say that they're "working on it." That's all that ever comes from these fucking hearings. "We're working on improving it", etc.

TALK TO THE POLICY LEADS.

Edit: And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the CEOs aren't at fault. They hired these people for a reason, they know they're politically motivated. They just aren't aware of every instance of censorship that happens on their platform.

1
DennJW 1 point ago +1 / -0

At this point, I would settle for the GOP just subpoenaing them LITERALLY every day, until they just get tired of it and cave.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
MindsetRoulette 1 point ago +1 / -0

That's funny because they ban Liberals all the time, they just think Liberals are Nazis too so they don't realize banning Liberals is a big part of why Trump became the big tent Party.

1
SaltyArmy 1 point ago +1 / -0

After TRUMP wins he need to dismantle these companies ASAP..