Why is my comment moderated again?

I also think that advertising should be taxed more heavily, but income rates should go down.

Socialism fails with real goods — not enough to go around. Zero-sum at any given time. Yet copying and “too cheap to monitor” digital content can be spread to all. All digital entertainment can be provided to all with digital connections at very very low cost per user.

Huge value of FB is that “everyone” is there; value of YouTube is that all videos can be found there. Should be possible to have a “Library of Congress – Video section” to fully duplicate all YouTube videos, and exclude those which violate the law, like child porn.

A related alternative is a Digital Utility Commission, which fines those media centers guilty of excess censorship. Big fines.

https://gatesofvienna.net/2019/06/mark-steyn-if-the-alternative-is-surrendering-our-liberty-over-death-threats-to-hell-with-that/#more-48404

That is flabbergasting foolishness.

Censorship is censorship, and the social media are in fact much more powerful than the state when freedom of speech is the issue.

They’re not doing that because they don’t want to and because they believe they’ll get away with it. Which they probably will. This is all about denying the political opposition the use of what were common tools of communication. It’s as if A T & T had cut off the Reagan’s campaign’s phone service in 1984. Keep in mind, their definition of ‘extremist’ includes Dennis Prager, so it also includes just about any articulate Republican this side of Susan Collins and Geoffrey Kabaservice.

Many may have seen this laid out before, though some may not have. Still, it is an apt description of what’s going on, both “against” YouTube and with the “co-operation” of sympathetic agents inside YouTube,
* * *
The description of how power is leveraged and activism organized is very enlightening, and can be discerned in other events.
The prescription for YouTube to outwait complaints would work very well, if YouTube wasn’t looking for excuses to ban conservatives and working with leftists to uncover them.
For corporations that aren’t inherently / covertly leftist: they should pay attention more carefully.
Note that the Left itself knows the value of outwaiting powerless opponents (Northam & Virginia).

‘What it will do is further embitter conservatives and, by ghettoizing their content, create an environment where it’s likely to become more strident and more extreme. It also infantilizes liberals and the general public, leaving them ignorant and unprepared to handle right wing arguments and political activism.”

Of course, they already don’t try to “handle” right wing arguments at all, and are dismissive of any right wing political activism, because there really hasn’t been any yet.
So far, the David French model of comity has prevailed (cf. McCarthy and Barr lauding Mueller back before his true colors were revealed).
The Ahmari model is gearing up now.

Many may have seen this laid out before, though some may not have. Still, it is an apt description of what’s going on, both “against” YouTube and with the “co-operation” of sympathetic agents inside YouTube, aimed, of course, at the Marxist’s and “woke’s” chosen political opposition — nominally Crowder, in this instance, along with everyone like him or even merely liking him. If innocent bystanders are felled along the way . . . ? The woke will put that blame on YouTube, shrug, and move on to their next targets.

What it will do is further embitter conservatives and, by ghettoizing their content, create an environment where it’s likely to become more strident and more extreme. It also infantilizes liberals and the general public, leaving them ignorant and unprepared to handle right wing arguments and political activism.

Mike