For people who want more government censorship (which seems to be mostly aligned with in the US with the Democrat party, at present), it seems like there's some blind spot in this, but I'm not exactly sure what.
When Trump 2.0 (or actually Trump) eventually wins a presidential election, why wouldn't he install his Breitbart 2.0 advisor as the head of DHS censorship? Do all the pro-censorship people not think this would turn into something abhorrent to them in a near-instant?
Or maybe they think right-leaning people are so disgusted by the thought of living in the DC area that they won't be available to work at DHS censorship when that change of power happens? Or maybe that there will be no one right-leaning with an appetite for censorship who would work at DHS censorship? That sounds implausible to me.
Surely they don't think that they've gotten past the inconvenience of ever being governed by people with whom they disagree? Aren't the pro-censorship people overwhelmingly likely to also be upset about the upcoming overturning of Roe v. Wade? That seems like a pretty strong indication that the winds sometimes shift in politics. Or, for people who find the Supreme Court to be solely a lagging indicator, we could take the recent Virginia governor election as a data point.
Or are pro-censorship people unaware that truth can take a long time to find?
Given that most people I meet feel more bad about the other team's president than they feel good about their own, why build this weapon?
When Trump 2.0 (or actually Trump) eventually wins a presidential election, why wouldn't he install his Breitbart 2.0 advisor as the head of DHS censorship? Do all the pro-censorship people not think this would turn into something abhorrent to them in a near-instant? Or maybe they think right-leaning people are so disgusted by the thought of living in the DC area that they won't be available to work at DHS censorship when that change of power happens? Or maybe that there will be no one right-leaning with an appetite for censorship who would work at DHS censorship? That sounds implausible to me. Surely they don't think that they've gotten past the inconvenience of ever being governed by people with whom they disagree? Aren't the pro-censorship people overwhelmingly likely to also be upset about the upcoming overturning of Roe v. Wade? That seems like a pretty strong indication that the winds sometimes shift in politics. Or, for people who find the Supreme Court to be solely a lagging indicator, we could take the recent Virginia governor election as a data point. Or are pro-censorship people unaware that truth can take a long time to find?
Given that most people I meet feel more bad about the other team's president than they feel good about their own, why build this weapon?