The Coup Under Your Nose

There most definitely is a “coup” taking place, but it’s not the one we’ve been hearing about ad-nauseum. Multi-billionaires are brazenly attempting to usurp the political process of most of the world, and it’s being cheered on by “rational” individuals. For a few years, we’ve been told that one guy is the most despicable person to ever walk the earth. We rejoice when it looks like big tech is getting rid of “the problem,” but don’t see the larger issue of a few billionaires controlling most of the internet. It’s as plain as day who really runs this country, and it’s not the politicians. Where are the environmental activists that used to protest about factories pumping excessive pollution? Where are the rabble-rousers that used to be outraged about poor treatment of domestic and foreign workers? Where are the Occupy Wall Street folks and Bernie Bros who railed against the one-percenters? Many of them are laser-focused on an impotent and symbolic impeachment process of someone who will be out of office within nine days.

One of the greatest challenges life has to offer is doing the most with the power you have. It’s a test that reveals character. We’ve seen it throughout time, and in all of Shakespeare’s history plays. Whenever it looks like your side has gained control of the resources, what do you do with those who are marginalized and don’t think the same way? Do you listen to and learn from them while not completely agreeing? Do you try to unite, understand their pain and help if you can? Do you do your best to mock and silence them out of fear of losing your ground? Do you insist that you are righteous and can do anything because God (either spiritual or metaphorical) is on your side? To quote P.F. Sloan, “when the wind changes, how quick we forget.”

Who in their right mind would argue that private electric companies should be able to shut off utilities to anyone at any time, because they’re private? We should see internet and social media monopolies in the same light. One could argue this to be false equivalency — that internet and social media are frivolous entertainment. They’re not as important as electricity, so there’s no reason to restrict the power of those who run them. To that I disagree. Social media companies and full access to the internet are essential for most people in the United States. They are integral to political and other campaigns of all sorts. They’re how much of the populace receives the news and communicates with others. They are the new public square, especially during a pandemic. They have taken over our lives, and many individual users make a living through these platforms. Any content creator knows that freedom of speech and freedom of expression are extremely important. A good philosophy to live by is “even if I don’t want to hear it, you’ve got a right to say it,” but this is no mere allegory. Both Trump’s main Twitter account and the POTUS Twitter account have already been ruled in a federal appeals court to be part of the public square. The 2019 ruling made it so no one could be blocked from commenting on those accounts.

The argument often put forth today by leftists is that those on the right who are pro-freedom should allow all private companies to do as they please. This makes no sense. Unless you’re an anarcho-capitalist purist (a very small part of the population), most people on the left, center and right believe in some form of regulation on companies, especially when they have monopoly. Libertarians tend to believe in fewer restrictions, as do many on the right. The left tends to support more restrictions. Pundits could have debates all day about what regulations make sense and what ones should be lifted, but the point is that more than 99% of those pontificating on these issues believe in some regulation.

These companies essentially get to decide whether we can participate in the modern day public square, in the middle of a pandemic, where assembly is effectively barred in the real world. Facebook, Twitter and YouTube have been purging users for years. It didn’t start nor will it end with Donald J. Trump. This latest riot is just a convenient excuse to abuse individuals and expedite such practices.

Regardless of your feelings about our 45th President, it’s hard to justify banning him from social media. He’s not God, and he’s not Satan. If he’s really fomenting violence, wouldn’t you want to see that so the authorities can act? One could make the argument that he should have anticipated that things would get dangerous. Perhaps he should have spoken out against violence earlier and more often than he did. But there were no subtle nor obvious calls to violence made from his account. If anyone reading this has conflicting evidence, feel free to share it. As of now, January 11th 2021, stating that President Trump ordered the riots comes off as partisan and hyperbolic. It’s either an expression of sheer dislike for the man, or a ploy to gain strategic advantage. (Schumer’s and Pelosi’s statements fall in the latter category.)

In much the same way, I would never blame the Beatles for the doings of the Manson Family, even though the latter made frequent fanciful interpretations of the White Album in a drug-addled haze prior to carrying out heinous acts. These criminals are adults and responsible for their own actions. They will face the consequences of the law. Violent protests and the destruction of property are wrong, and that also applies to the numerous “fiery but mostly peaceful” protests Black Lives Matter, Antifa and other leftists undertook in 2020 that killed dozens, injured hundreds and caused billions in damage. If those events represent “the voice of the unheard,” then like it or not, so does the January 6th riot. It should go without saying that aside from clear-cut cases of self-defense, violence, looting and destruction are immoral and should be condemned. Their normalization in society is most troubling, but I digress.

No one should be “depersoned” on the internet — not even the vilest person on earth. Open discussion is the best disinfectant to bad ideas. Criminal activity, direct threats of violence and calls thereof should be removed and reported to the authorities whenever possible. But everyday people who want to shut down others for any other reason on social media are simply afraid of engagement. The monopoly CEOs are focused on profit and the elimination of competition at all costs — it’s not at all about morality. The “coup” is not the rioting of a bunch of imbeciles, it is the power these companies have over you and me. If they can “deperson” the sitting President, they can do it to anyone.

Censorship and the destruction of civil liberties are usually sold on a silver platter of gingerbread preliminaries and good intentions. Platitudes like “we’re keeping you safe” and “we’re getting rid of hate speech” are commonplace. Remember the Parents Music Resource Center proposal that Frank Zappa repeatedly spoke out against in the 1980’s? What we’re seeing with the internet now is far worse. A few billionaires and their underlings get to decide what is acceptable, what to hit with a “disputed” or “fact-check” scarlet letter, and what is so dangerous that no virgin eyes can see it. Invisible drones making these distinctions for us are not required to be elected officials, social scientists, nor medical experts. They have no expertise to speak of.

Ultimately, aside from the illegal instances outlined above, censorship of speech does very little good for society. It makes us angrier, less able to relate to others, and less likely to engage with opposing arguments. Having a different platform for each worldview is untenable. Society benefits most when people of various persuasions are free to engage in open conversations. Regretfully, we’ve been seeing the erosion of that for some time.