The Legendary Dragon Alephwyr, named Alephwyr, BA

I hear quite frequently arguments to the effect that private platforms are legally _allowed_ to silence people. And yes, they are, and yes, they should be. Is this a good idea, though? Let's have a quick look for a moment.

It's possible to imagine a society where every restaurant refuses service to people of the wrong political background, every supermarket checks to see if people arriving match a particular political affiliation before selling them groceries.

We can imagine neighbors only talking to other neighbors of the correct political tribe, jobs refusing to allow people with the wrong political beliefs to apply, etc. This is probably a thing that is legal or at least ought to be legal.

Is it, however, a recipe for a peaceful society? Or would it ultimately lead to something more bloody than the wars of religion during the Protestant Reformation?

(As I recall, by the end of the Thirty Years War, whole sections of Germany were completely depopulated; you could walk tens of miles through burned villages seeing not a single living soul.)

Our society developed norms long ago that said "we try to ignore our neighbors political, social, and religious beliefs, not because we agree with them or wish to promote them, but so that they too will tolerate ours and everyone will get along peacefully."

Right now, we're seeing an unprecedented erosion of this centuries-standing social compact, and it is not doing good things for our society. Yes, we _can_ deplatform our enemies, we _can_ deny the wrong news outlet internet connectivity for its servers.

We _can_ kick people we think go beyond some sort of line off our platforms, we can try to keep them from communicating. I don't think it's a good idea. I think in the end it simply feeds the narrative that our society is biased against certain tribes, and radicalizes people.