Actually most people there seem to perceive it as an alternative to the biased nature of Twitter. They didn't want to get banned on Twitter for something that's being tolerated when done by left-leaning groups.
e.g. there are prolife groups that say nothing negative against any people, but get banned for explaining the facts behind abortion and who does it
however, i am talking about an entirely separate group that goes out of its way to not say anything hateful and not condone violence due to tragic occurrences in the past, yet gets banned due to pointing out inconvenient and very uncomfortable truths
if free speech cannot protect uncomfortable yet unhateful speech, it is worthless
in the past abortionists have been shot due to what prolifers have said, so now they go out of their way to avoid anything hateful and violence inducing, yet they are getting deplatformed en mass in the fallout from 6 Jan, which is entirely unrelated to their messaging
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Live_Action_(organization)#S...
https://twitter.com/LiveAction
https://www.facebook.com/liveaction
Looking through their feed they have a real bug up their butt about Planned Parenthood.
Well, I guess they were deplatformed a bit:
Again, not true.
Parler was created in response to biased moderation of other platforms and was intended to be bipartisan.
It's not too far off to say "Parlor was created as a space for hate". Only used for hate is obviously wrong, but that doesn't change much.