Well I’d say the nuance here is that while it’s hard to break through when those ecosystems have a hold on them, and it’s hard to compete with them, being a censorial editor for them really only makes sense if they really can be considered not in their right mind and not have the capacity to think or care for themselves.

I don’t really think censorship is the solution as much as finding a way to break the spell of whatever has overtaken right wing thought.

I think the public right wing response to both Luigi Mangione and to Musk promoting H1Bs shows that while they’ve sucked down racism, on some level they understand that the corporate world exists to harm workers. They just haven’t found solidarity with the workers of the rest of the world yet, and it’s finding a way to crack that barrier and get them to see themselves in others. I think it’s very hard but not impossible.

I think part of the problem is the nature of our media and how consolidated it is and how rare real independent news media is at the moment in this country. I think we’d do better to tackle that at a community level than we would to just outright censor it.

Like, an example… You have a child and you want to know what they’re watching on television for their mental health. Is it better to watch those things with them and discuss the themes and ideas with them and help them contextualize it all in a healthy way or censor the things you don’t like and never discuss them so the child enters the world wholly without the knowledge of these subjects. I’d say based on personal experience that the latter doesn’t work out so hot for the kid.

Censorship and control of information without discussion isn’t a good path, whereas openness and communication does.