(The same limitations will likely occur at the original platforms as populations leave)

“Alternative truths” which have been disseminated widely and used to storm a capital (where there were deaths). It could have been way worse. Being involved in online organization of something like that probably isn’t great for your brand.

Politics has a problem on both sides were business gets more ear than people.

They don’t debate and they know they’re right. What’s the point in keeping them?

What's way more worrying to me is that they aren't listening to the people that try to understand their perspectives, but keep them grounded in reality. It seems to have become an 'either you are with us, or against us'-situation for a huge number of people, sadly.

There is literally nothing of value to be gained.

But I don't see how Facebook taking down the group is the fault of the Left at large (or in the US). I don't know many serious Leftists who are fond of Facebook, not to mention feel the company represents them.

I don't mean to rationalize its removal. It sounds like a project that should exist, one that serves as a mirror for introspection.

This isn't something new or that "the left" only does. In much the same way we see lgbtq groups closed because the algorithm or human moderator believes queerness == explicit sexual content rather than "a bunch of other humans"

So what’s the problem?

Politics isn't.

This is a very simple concept, yet I find myself having to explain it to a lot of people.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Wisconsin_protests

Election officials and reputable news sources have repeatedly stated why there is no reason to believe the election was stolen. There is no assumption about who is right, only repeated proof.

Without a platform to spread disinformation, there would have been just a few dozen people who believed otherwise, and the raid on the Capitol would not have happened.

Are people online actually open to talking?

I get they write messages, and a lot of messages. But it strikes me no one ever actually changes their mind. They just yell at each other till they move on to another hill to yell from.

It's all so tiring, it's like when I used to watch some friends do prep for school debates. They're just practicing arguing, the topic itself is secondary to the argument.

I'm probably too cynical, but I also know every time I try to have a real discussion online, it ends badly.

The problem comes once they have changed - getting them to change back, or to change again seems almost impossible.

Well, 25% of the time.

The best way to stop violent extremists.

That's a nice idea, until someone thinks "doesn't work out" includes "I don't get the electoral result that I wanted".

I'd further wager that any protest in the counterfactual would have been a much smaller scale, and much less violent. 2016 being an example of Democrat supporters accepting an election result they didn't like - with officials taking a legal approach into their plaint with the election campaign (i.e., Russian interference) based on trying to build a case on evidence... not making indefensible claims about a conspiring deep state.

The real problem is that there's an epistemic crisis whereby people have lost trust in long-lived and functioning institutions, and that has been fuelled by conspiracy theorists, some of which have been given credence by the sitting president (e.g., Alex Jones).

https://www.cnn.com/2017/01/06/politics/electoral-college-vo...

https://mobile.twitter.com/speakerpelosi/status/864522009048...

The mainstream media refuses to take seriously issues raised by libertarians/paleoconservatives like getting rid of qualified immunity. I don’t see Cato Institute people trying to stage a coup.

The mainstream media compared Bernie’s victories to Hitler’s conquest of Germany and said on live TV that they worried if he won there’d be executions in Central Park. Bernie Sanders didn’t incite a riot and then call the rioters “good, special people.”

This is such a bizarre false equivalence, like claiming I should weigh equally the opinion of my doctor and a patient at an insane asylum.

By now, there seem to be a lot of fragments that used to be part of "the left" but were alienated or pushed out over disagreements about gender issues.

The discussion if feminism should a) create equal chances or b) also correct past wrongs by inverse discrimination has been around for a long time. But only recently has it become so divisive.

And science is not an American institution... if one distrust the science of every major nation then what’s left? If one distrusts all reporting outlets and international signals for COVID or climate change, then what’s left?

The web may be full of misinformation, but in some ways it’s also a golden age for education.

Trump supporters are not hapless victims by any standard of the imagination. The plain fact is that they (and in particular their leader) have lost legitimacy and credibility and are refusing to accept the fact. And I have to say that to a large extent this loss has something to do with many of them (and in particular their leader) being assholes for the last 5 years.

I mean, do you think scientists need to give flat earthers more latitude?

Because you are on the same boat with them. If they overturn the boat, you'll fall into the water.

I do not say that it is easy to be concerned, it is hard, because it leaves mind in the state of uncertainty: there are no known ways to tackle the problem. There are different ways to deal with it, but all simple ways (like throw them all over the board) are not acceptable and probably wouldn't work (some tried and it didn't turn well). These simple ways could bring mind into the state of peace: everything is decided, no uncertainty, they are the bad guys, we are the good ones, but what is more important to you: the peace of mind or a thinking process constantly seeking for ways to tackle a problem?

People mostly choose peace of mind, because they have other problems to worry about. I do not blame them, anxiety is a thing that makes life worse. But as for me, people might be better if they learned how to live with uncertainty without having to worry about the part of uncertainty that is out of their control.

Do you think we would have heard no unfounded accusations of fraud? No challenges in court? No protests and riots? After the year we've had?

And if, on January 6, as Congress was meeting to confirm the Electoral College vote for Trump, a riotous mob had stormed the Capitol and disrupted proceedings for a few hours, would it have been reported the same way? Would left-wing activist social media accounts be getting deplatformed?

It didn't happen. Might not have. But if it did, would you be calling it a coup? Would you be so disturbed about the attempt to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power?

I'm not defending what happened. I'm asking, if it were reversed, how would you feel. Be honest.

Also it’s called a coup because the president in power incited a mob to attack congress. Your hypothetical is missing that part.

What's happening is that people who copy-paste/reshare conspiracy theories without even bothering to read the wikipedia/snopes article first are being rightly downvoted.

I think of Trump's fan base seems more like a religious minority than a political group. And like any religious group debate really isn't the answer to fantastical beliefs.