This view that only government's can censor, that only state agents coming to your house and slapping something over your mouth counts as limiting free speech, really needs to be tackled.

The oddest part is that's it's generally the left which seems most content to let private companies wield extraordinary power over who can speak and how.
There are all sorts of legitimate reasons to limit free speech. Right now we are seeing one of them with Trump - to prevent incitement to violence and a threat to the functioning of democracy. But it is still censorship.
We need to be clear that that is what it is, rather than limiting our definition of censorship to the smallest range of actions conceivable.
This is not a new idea. Benjamin Constant, Harriet Taylor and John Stuart Mill were treating the silencing which comes from society as equivalent, or more dangerous, than that of the state hundreds of years ago.
Redefining censorship as state-only is like winding back the maturity and sophistication of liberal thought back to the pre-Napoleonic era.
The other distinction which needs to be made is between a social media site like Twitter, which really has become equivalent to the public square - a key part of civic life - and a publication like a magazine.
Being booted from one is not equivalent in effect, even if it might be in cause, from being booted from another.
Anyway more thoughts on this - mostly questions rather than answers - here https://t.co/9KW6GIGhm8

More from Government

🔷 Rev. Raphael Warnock has become the first Democrat to win a Georgia Senate race in 20 years

The politician spoke to voters via MSNBC this morning

https://t.co/T9oJN2fjmo


Warnock is a pastor at the Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta where civil rights leader Martin Luther King once preached.

He will become Georgia's first Black senator


This blue victory gives the Democrats the chance to regain control of the Senate for at least the first two years of the Biden presidency


"With Biden proposing to reverse President Donald Trump's tax cut, increase the minimum wage, and strengthen oversight on various industries, some might argue that his agenda is not particularly market-friendly," says Vasu Menon, investment strategy director at OCBC Bank
2017 https://t.co/kiqQoWR57e


https://t.co/W18nqFlLru


The GOP got rid of the SCOTUS filibuster so they could jam through three fringy right-wing Alito clones, including one right before the election, but sure thing, bud.

“Uh, actually, they got rid of the SCOTUS filibuster because Harry Reid did it first for something totally different! I am very smart!”

No. Knock it off.

Here’s the thing about the “But Harry Reid...” excuse:

1. McConnell was holding up Obama nominees, some *for literal years* without a vote.

2. Had he *not* done that, Trump would have inherited *even more* vacant seats.

You May Also Like