Far from conjecture, the similarities between how Adolph Hitler ran Nazi Germany and how Jack Dorsey runs Twitter are striking. Both individuals are guilty of silencing those with whom they disagree, and both are guilty of operating their regimes with zero transparency – both Hitler and Dorsey acting as de facto dictators in purging "undesirables" from the conversation.
Consider the fact that Dorsey and his Silicon Valley "brown shirts" have been actively de-platforming, shadow banning, and in many other ways unfairly targeting conservatives, Christians, and other voices, simply for expressing views and opinions that contradict what Dorsey and his digital soldiers personally believe – which is exactly what Hitler did by publicly tagging Jews with sleeve stars, before later exterminating them.
While Twitter has yet to reach the point where it's loading "offensive" users into actual ovens, the social media giant is, in many ways, forcing its opposition into digital gas chambers for no other reason than expressing viewpoints that Twitter finds unacceptable.
Twitter users who align with Dorsey's views are given little blue checkmarks next to their names, allowing them unlimited free speech without restriction. But those who don't align with Dorsey's views are denied this "VIP" status, and are subject to a host of oppressive and arbitrary "community guidelines" that are selectively enforced against just them – which, again, echoes the discriminatory actions of Hitler in dividing Germany along racial and political lines.
"Twitter is increasingly obliging the left when it comes to censorship," writes Rachel Alexander for Town Hall. "The company's list of 'offensive' speech is growing," she adds. "Now, calling a transgender person by their pre-transition names or referring to them with the 'wrong' pronouns can get someone banned."
For more related news, be sure to check out Censorship.news.
To those who would try to contend that Twitter is a private company, and is thus immune from being held accountable for its rampant censorship and discrimination tactics, it's important to remember that Twitter and many other social media companies are blatantly violating the law by acting as both public utilities and publishers.
Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) clearly states that tech companies must operate as either content providers or content publishers – and not both. And since Twitter, Facebook, and the rest are, in fact, continuously acting as both, they're long overdue to be broken up by the federal government for functioning as monopolistic tyrants against free speech.
"There isn't much of a 'town public square' anymore where anyone can go spout their views to a large crowd outside," adds Alexander about how social media platforms like Twitter have become the new digital public spaces where people exchange their views – and should be allowed to do so freely.
"Instead, if we want to get a message out free to a large group of people, we're forced to use private social media platforms. Times have changed, and those who think we can ignore this restructuring of speech do so at their own peril," she further warns.
To keep up with the latest Big Tech assaults against free speech, be sure to check out FirstAmendment.news.
Sources for this article include: