On December 18, 2017, Twitter banned the Twitter accounts belonging to American Renaissance, Jared Taylor, Eli Mosley, and suspended the accounts belonging to Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding, the leaders of Britain First. This purge occurred after Twitter came under fire in mid-November for “letting sexual and racial harassment and ‘hateful’ imagery go unchecked – while providing a big, free platform to the alt-right.” On Monday, Twitter’s response was formally enforced. According to Fortune:
“Users will no longer be able to use ‘hateful images or symbols’ in profile images or headers. And, in a step with few recent parallels, Twitter says users ‘may not affiliate with organizations that – whether by their own statements or activity both on and off the platform – use or promote violence against civilians to further their causes.'”
On InfoWars, lobbyist and opposition researcher Roger Stone foretold that such rules would act as a “gag” for “anybody who stands up for freedom, or stands up for Donald Trump.”
We’ve updated our rules around abuse and hateful conduct as well as violence and physical harm. These changes will be enforced starting December 18. Read our updated rules here: https://t.co/NGVT3qGFvg
— Twitter Safety (@TwitterSafety) November 17, 2017
However, nothing catastrophic actually occurred during this “purge.” Reports show that, including the accounts listed above, only fourteen or so “Nazi” Twitter accounts were removed. Nonetheless, Gab.ai, an “alt-Twitter” that stands for freedom of speech and opposes censorship, has seen monumental increases in the past several months.
In short, the Twitter Purge was a joke.
In response to the laughably small effect that Twitter’s plan to censor offensive content, The Rolling Stone published a relatively lengthy article, complaining that Twitter’s actions only “fueled the alt-right’s sense of ‘white victimhood.'” Interestingly, The Rolling Stone criticized Twitter for suspending the account of Jared Taylor, claiming that he had been “well behaved” on the platform. This, of course, was proof for many that Twitter was not censoring violence, but ideas.
READ THE ROLLING STONE’S ARTICLE: How Twitter’s Alt-Right Purge Fell Short
The Rolling Stone also complained that both Richard Spencer and David Duke survived the purge. Because of this, the publication accused Twitter of intending nothing more than “profitable and well-publicized ‘purge’ of its vilest accounts.”
It is entertaining to read a well-known publication that benefits from the freedom of expression via social mediums and platforms complain that certain public figures are not being censored. The press should not be an enemy of freedom or politically incorrect content; rather, as a medium of the free exchange of information, publications such as The Rolling Stone should encourage the public to express their thoughts, regardless of how offensive they may be. After all, if someone is offended, nothing happens except for a raise in certain neurochemicals in the offendee’s brain. Offense is not violence, and the fact that the two are correlated on a regular basis by the media is telling that tolerance is no longer accepting the differences of others; rather, progressivism and tolerance are the tools of censorship to silence the voices of conservatism and neoreaction.
Like my content? Consider buying me a cup of coffee! Squawker Media is a grassroots media outlet comprised of independent journalists and are in desperate need of support to keep this cause going. I appreciate all of my readers, as I would be nothing without your loyalty or support.