It is non-controversial to say that the liberal, “progressive” print and electronic media platforms, universities, discriminate against conservatives and libertarians. These private censors do not deny this; they are proud of themselves for upholding civilized values, as they see them.
These wokists have banned and de-platformed or threatened to do so to numerous spokesmen with perspectives that diverge from their left-wing views. Included in this list are: Dan Bongino, Tucker Carlson, Tom Cotton, Mike Enoch (aka Mike Penovich), Louis Farrakhan, Sean Hannity, Josh Hawley, Chuck Johnson, Alex Jones, Mark Levin, Jared Little, Patrick Little, Laura Loomer, Heather MacDonald, Gavin McInnes, Charles Murray, Paul Nehlen, Camille Paglia, Rand Paul, Ron Paul, Dennis Prager, Joe Rogan, J. K. Rowling, Richard Spencer, Donald Trump, Paul Joseph Watson, Wikileaks, Milo Yiannopoulos.
This is the merest tip of the proverbial iceberg. A full list would include literally hundreds of thousands of folks.
I personally do not support the very disparate viewpoints of all these people. Indeed, I regard several of them as despicable. However, I think it is an outrage they are not allowed to speak out, and we are prohibited from hearing their voices. As the old saying goes, sunlight, not banning, is the best disinfectant.
John Stuart Mill said it exceedingly well when he wrote: “If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind.”
What is the reason for the cancellation of scholars and activists with right-wing and free market viewpoints? These public intellectuals have been found guilty of being offensive, peddling misinformation, disinformation, and hate speech. But these charges are very subjective and highly debatable. Such people have also been found guilty stiflers of not being sufficiently woke or politically correct. This is undeniable.
The First Amendment will not help protect conservative and libertarian voices, since the courts have ruled that this part of the Constitution is on the side of the likes of Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google, Instagram, Patreon, Reddit, Twitter, WhatsApp, YouTube and all the other usual suspects. They have been deemed private enterprises, who may invite to the websites whoever they wish.
What then, would be the last best hope for a return to robust debate in our land of the free and home of the brave? One answer is alternative electronic media which are open to all comers. Another possibility is platforms that copy the present institutions which limit robust speech, only they bar socialists, communists, and their ilk. Possible examples include Epik, Gab, Gettr (now failed), Mewe, Parler (now offline), Rumble, Signal, Telegram, Truth Social, Voat, Zello. As well there are BitChute, Gephi, Incel, Pizzagate and QAnon. Hopefully, out of all of these initiatives will arise a few platforms of which John Stuart Mill could be proud.
The problem is that the left has stolen a march on the right. Apart from Fox, the Wall Street Journal, the Epoch Times and just a few other electronic and print media, the towering members of this communication industry are all on only one side of the political spectrum. Inertia (think qwerty) makes it difficult for newcomers to gain adherents and come to play important roles.
But why limit our focus on this one industry? Should hotels, restaurants, groceries be able to discriminate against conservatives and libertarians? Should we impose common carrier status on all such firms? Donald Trump’s former Press Secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders was refused restaurant service. At this rate, there will be separate Democratic and Republican shopping malls, theaters, ball parks, etc. Some for supporters of socialism, others catering to those who favor capitalism.
Do decent men really want to go there? Hardly. But we know which side started this particular snowball rolling.