The power of a nation state is based on its ability to maintain and control property, levy taxes and enforce compliance with its authority through a monopoly on violence. The premise that Google or any web platform has anything near the power of a nation state is ridiculous.
Also, Google isn't an independent state, they're a corporation and as such are subject to the laws of the nation(s) in which they operate. They do what they do because governments allow them to, not because they have the power to defy governments at will.
[1] - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TbKxUYl3WSE
I agree! But, given that it exists, acting against it is hardly neutral either. I would argue - and this is deliberately a separate post from the top of thread - that many of the problems come from techno-libertarianism mistaking neutrality for impartiality, and assuming that a technology that doesn't explicitly mention politics is apolitical.
The internet allows true information to circumvent censors and permit the organisation of dissident groups against repression. It also permits the circulation of false or misleading information which has the effect of promoting violence and repression. Trying to distil this down to "internet good" or "internet bad" without having a clearly articulated politics is silly.
FTFY