Remember that the core of the problem with what the Twitter Files are telling us is an ethical/moral dilemma. It’s not simply a legal or procedural dilemma. It’s not just a political game.
The speech they are seeking to control is already in our control. We can follow who we want, unfollow who we want, and block who we want. Why would anyone support cancellation when they can simply unfollow or block someone they don’t want to hear from? Because they want to control what other people see, read and think.
Different players are arguing about who did what and when and if it is even significant. But there is something at the core of this that is undeniably deeper and more important than the details we’re seeing bandied about.
Several of our governmental organizations decided it was their goal to inject themselves into our conversations and influence the way we think.
They put their hands on the mouths of some, turned down the volume on other voices, and elevated the voices they liked. There is no difference between speaking and thinking, and they decided that they should be shaping our speech and thought.
Since when is it the job of any government to shape the speech and thought of their citizens?
Is there anything more totalitarian than that? What makes them think that they are justified in doing that in the first place?
How many times do we need to witness totalitarianism in real life as we did in the twentieth century, or in fictional accounts like 1984, before we simply say, “No. That’s never your job. Outside of a small sliver of speech already deemed illegal, go away. If we think something illegal was done, we will contact you. Until then, f#@k off.”
Instead of arguing over shallow details, let’s get down to why they think - and maybe why you think - that governments have any right to the speech and thought of their citizens.