[gd1]

>The idea that banning certain information will somehow result in it disappearing has been shown repeatedly to not work

Maybe it didn't work in the old days.

But now maybe the CEO of Cloudflare will wake up one morning, decide he doesn't like your politics and block your DNS.

Now you might wake up one morning and find that Mailchimp have terminated your account because they don't like your politics (Molyneux).

Now your social media twitter clone might be banned by the Apple/Google store because they don't like what people are posting on it (Gab). As if you're a publisher... which you're not under section 230...

Now your GoFundme gets pulled if whatever leftist running GoFundme decides they don't like you.

Now the payment companies won't process your payments (too many examples to name).

Now, despite being the fourth largest newspaper in the country, your twitter account will be disabled indefinitely for posting "hacked" "russian disinformation" that turns out to be neither hacked nor disinformation. And we find out after the election that the Attorney General of Delaware has been investigating this matter for over a year.

Now some dipshit moderator on Hacker News will shadowban you permanently on a whim.

Your google docs will be blocked for violating the terms of service.

Youtube will demonetize you.

There is nowhere to hide from the dystopia that every fucking retarded left-winger here is so eager to embrace. It's like being in the middle of the red scare, but everyone says they're ok with telephone companies listening to the bad people's conversations and disconnecting their phone lines if they mention communism. Because, you know, they're "private companies" or something. The only cold comfort is that it will surely be used against them one day.

AnD wHy dId PeOpLe vOtE fOr a RacIst??!!

[Reelin]

You have an incredibly well put message here, but then you went and tacked on those last two paragraphs that border on uncivil, are polarizing, and (IMO) fail to add anything meaningful.

[southeastern]

>Because, you know, they're "private companies" or something.

Wait so are you for them being able to do whatever they want, where you can be banned from their service? Or do you want them under the arm of the government where they could be regulated? I think you're just mad at the culture. Trump isn't gonna fix that

[Reelin]

Those aren't mutually exclusive. The government can simultaneously regulate specific behaviors of large entities where there is reason for concern while otherwise largely leaving them to do whatever they want.

I don't think GP is necessarily suggesting that Trump will address their objections or that they personally support him. Rather, I read it as suggesting that much of his support may in fact be due to backlash against such cultural trends on the left.