Hi Yasuaki, Thanks for the reply. I think you may be using the terms censorship and free speech very loosely. In the United States, there is a constitutional protection against being prosecuted by the government for expressing ideas, providing those ideas are not an incitement to do violence. This protection is often referred to as our right to “free speech”.
Based on this definition, the actions of Amazon to shut down Parler have little to do with Free speech. First, Amazon is a private company, not the government. They have a right to do whatever they want. And second, Parler was not expressing crass or socially incorrect opinions - they were literally calling for the assassination of the vice president (as well as calls for violence against people of color and referencing periods of our history in which black folks were hung from trees with impunity). It’s hard to over state how this movement is a violent, terror campaign.
Having said that, the fact that Amazon, which essentially operates as a dictatorship led by Jeff Bezos, can shutdown an Internet platform and, due to their monopolistic power, ensure that they cannot find a similar service any where else is a HUGE problem.
Fundamentally, this is a problem of unfettered capitalism and profit-focused Internet development.
I also am not convinced with the argument that it’s better to have the right wing in the mainstream rather then forcing them underground. Our society has clear lines that we agree are not ok to cross, mostly dealing with killing, hurting or terrorizing people. We recognize that these activities are inconsistent with building a society in which everyone is safe and so we do not tolerate them and honestly we don’t worry about driving them underground.
I think that the argument that the fascist movement in the United States should be allow to organize in the open is based on a mis-taken belief that they are some how not a violent and terrorizing movement.