Dan Bongino was one of many conservative leaders who thought the free market could provide a platform for free speech and put Facebook and Twitter to shame. He invested in Parler, and the platform promised users a safe haven from Big Tech censorship. That effort has failed because Big Tech wields unlimited power and was able to shut down Parler, lest they acquiesce to adopt Big Tech’s policies of thought control and speech control. Amazon, Apple and Google swept in and banned the Parler social networking app from their services and app store, blaming Parler and their users for inciting riots on the U.S. Capitol building.
Facebook and Twitter have accelerated their attacks, going as far as banning Ron Paul, the most peaceful, wise Congressman that has ever served the United States. The President himself has been cut off from his own Facebook, Twitter, and email service and cannot communicate with his supporters through any Big Tech channels. Small government conservatives thought that they could build alternative platforms, but the left-wing authoritarians revealed just how dictatorial they could be, destroying any online opportunity conservatives thought they had, banning them from any infrastructure, and forcing their communications into the dark web.
For years, conservatives did not want the government to interfere with private corporation’s speech policies. Conservatives thought that Americans could construct their own online communities that reflect the culture of their company’s founders. But as Big Tech begins to cripple any alternative, what choice do conservatives, independents and free-thinking individuals have now? Do they continue to surrender and be bullied into silence, overtaken by the left-wing authoritarians? What are the legal remedies? Section 230 of the Online Communication Decency Act promises immunity for unlimited Big Tech censorship of individuals. These platforms have the blessing of the federal government to restrict speech they don’t like. Now these left-wing authoritarians all work together to eliminate their political opposition. It’s not just conservatives that are being targeted. Anyone who dares speak out about the censorship or dissents to liberal policies can be shadow banned and taken down. Those who are silenced or accused are not given their day in court.
When people flock to a new platform, Big Tech targets the new platform. When Parler became popular, it promoted ideas that worried Facebook and Twitter. Big Tech is now calling Parler’s users “far right extremists and conspiracy theorists” -- domestic terrorists who incite insurrection.
Google used this false accusation and character assassination attempt to justify their coordinated bans on Parler. Apple followed by banning Parler from their app store and Amazon proceeded to kick Parler off of its Amazon Web Services. Now vendors are joining in and abandoning Parler across the board. Big Tech is so powerful, it dictates the policies of other companies and can falsely accuse people with impunity. All the users of Parler are not allowed to have their own community, where they can share their own ideas. Conservatives underestimated these all powerful entities.
This Big Tech-Big Government alliance, now emboldened by the incoming Biden administration, will never allow serious competition to flourish. These Big Tech bullies are the textbook example of monopolies and their actions and motivations are the real reason why the founding fathers established the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.
In order to be successful, a new social media company must build its own web hosting platform, its own payment processor, its own financial system, its own email software, etc. This is practically impossible when the government continues to endorse the monopolies that bully people and stifle their content.
The federal government should instead be enforcing an Internet Bill of Rights that gives due process rights and an appeal process to all who get banned for political and ideological reasons. Big Tech should not be indemnified from prosecution; they should be held to account for abusing people in the public square.