><snip>
>
>>The question then becomes how do we protect the impressionable from extremist and harmful thought, from ideas that harm our society? That is a complex problem, no doubt. But to give the power of censorship to a few who can then control the narrative and influence outcomes is itself a great evil and a great danger.
>
>Twiter, Facebook, Google, and others are in this camp - they are the new gatekeepers and they use their position to drive a narrative. Is that a societal good?

That's the problem it is. But that does not stop that Nazis must be censored to broadcast into the wild. If you own a pub. you can throw out idiots or not. Keeping the idiots will make your pub an idiots place. If you own a social media you have the same choice. And we have the right and duty to name places where the idiots gather. That is participation in democracy. Living in a democracy does not mean to let every idiot have it's saying. It means to stand up and fight for the values of the democracy.

And again, if Parler let Nazis spread there poison, Parlers ownership is antidemocratic and most likely Nazi. A democrat would work different.

Who watches the watchers is a problem, but better Google, Twitter and even Facebook then Parler watching.