[soundnote]

It depends in part on what you consider to be fact. Part of the problem of the modern day is that the two tribes have in parts wildly diverging views on reality (and by my estimate both believe in some very nonsensical things), and the mainstream outlets very much encourage leftist brands of nonsense.

The other issue is that if the mainstream thing bans certain things, any free speech alternative will be excessively populated by the witches the mainstream platform hunted. This is inevitable especially if the platform is convenient enough to be competitive.

Which is a little tragic since a bunch of the banned people don't get banned just for politically dissenting thought but just plain awful behavior even by other standards. Regardless, it's inevitable, so painting alt platforms as hives of scum and villainy and thus cutting them down being justified more or less ensures that alt platforms won't come to exist in a relevant way.

The fringe spaces will only get less silly if they're allowed to live and we can talk to people. Being able to talk with civilized people doesn't cure political disagreement or argument, but it lets you see the human on the other side of the nickname. I actively hunt interesting people across the political landscape to follow for that reason. Besides, I'm likely to learn something I otherwise wouldn't have from someone reasoned that I disagree with. People with shared politics only go so far. But people also need comfortable base camps from which to explore.

[scns]

"If you can cultivate the right attitude, your enemies are your best spiritual teachers because their presence provides you with the opportunity to enhance and develop your tolerance, patience and understanding." - Buddha