Armed insurrections planned on Twitter/Facebook in the middle east (the Arab Spring): widely celebrated in the USA.
Armed insurrections planned on Parler/Gab in the USA: better shut those down completely.
The distinction between these two is precisely political, the view on the legitimacy of the conversation is premised on whether you view the government as legitimate or not.
I am not sure if you truly wish to understand the point here, but consider the protests in Hong Kong.
No lies. No allegations of fraud. The people just do not want to be ruled that way. Facts just don't matter to politics and never have.
I think it is a weak move on China's part to crack down like they are. I think it is a weak move to stifle speech and organization. I think some of the protesters certainly broke laws and will be held criminally liable. I continue to hope that Hong Kongers will win the ability to determine their own destiny.
I think that Biden fairly won the election. I just think that it is a sad day when the USA who so used to embody the idea of "I disagree with what you say but will fight to my death for your right to say it," no longer embodies that idea. I disagree with what they were saying precisely because of the facts. It is weak politics to consider that that disagreement means deplatforming.
AFAIK all relevant court cases were dismissed and didn't go into discovery. There is an opinion that all of the cases were baseless. There is an opinion that judges saw where the wind blows and took an easy way out. Since we're not going to see any serious investigation, you can pick whichever you like.
None of the dozens of cases were based on evidence, so of course they were dismissed. Judges don't just throw them out because they "see where the wind blows".
