Half of the US fought for the right to own other humans as property. You are very, very sheltered if you think large numbers of people aren't capable of holding terrible ideas and performing horrific acts.
The CSA was certainly not half of the United States at that time. They inflated their numbers with the "3/5 compromise". Even with that method of inflating their representation, 11 states with 66 House Representatives seceded, while 23 states with 173 House Representatives did not secede. It wasn't close to half.
On top of which, the decision process for secession was (shockingly, I know!) not democratic in the least. The Union didn't need a "Home Guard" to enforce conscription, but the South did.
I suggest we call it what it was and say the "slavery war" instead of the "civil war" (civil war is generic and even the American Revolution was a civil war)
And yet Parlor is being de-platformed specifically because it refuses to police the portion of the conservative conversation that is so. It's not because they believe in smaller government or lower taxes.
Conservatism plays this game where it uses this violent rhetoric casually and then acts all surprised when its own members act on that rhetoric. They tell each other that anyone who disagrees with them is an anti-american who want to make this a communist/socialist/fascist state. That voter fraud is rampant and that they will need to overthrow the government with violence. They do this is, in much more graphic detail than I'm using here.
Then, when something violent occurs, we're all just supposed to sit here and pretend like it's just some happenstance and we shouldn't judge them by their own inaction in stamping out the rhetoric from their midst.
The violent groups that organized on Facebook, does anyone feel Google or Apple should penalize Facebook for allowing that to occur? Should all Facebook users be deplatformed?
Looking at the size of alternative online communities like Parler, they're definitely not half of the voter base. Majority of republicans seem to not have a problem with mainstream platforms, only a small minority gets banned.
And it is really easy to see they are a minority. Most of alternative platforms like Parler have a small number of users and attract a very narrow audience which talks only about politics. Usually these sites have bad user experience which means there's not a lot of designers who would want to work for them, they are really bad in technical execution meaning there's not really many programmers who want to work for them. They don't advertise meaning there's not a lot of marketing experts wanting to work for them. There's not a lot of investors willing to invest in those platforms, no one wants to advertise on their sites. All this can lead to a conclusion that the users affected by deplatforming and censorship on mainstream social media is a really small group of people. They believe they are half of the voter base, while in reality the majority of society, from conservatives to liberals, rejects their world views and this is why they are marginalized.
If it was really half of the voter base they wouldn't have any issues. There would be some viable, popular alternative social media platforms used by that half of voter base. Among that half you'd have no issue with finding anything you need to have a widespead, catch-all platform - you'd find investors, you'd find companies willing to advertise, the user base would have diverse interests so that you can discuss anything on those platforms like on mainstream social media, and not just politics, conspiracy theories and memes. The fact that they constantly can't find support means that they are a fringe movement.
It's simply not possible that all investors, programmers, designers, hosting companies, payment processors, advertisers, etc. are all run by the left half of the voter base. That is simply statistically unlikely.
The power of the internet means sure they can. Like that poor Macedonian women who was so upset to be maxed when she was trying be a revolutionary. Our brains are surprisingly susceptible to weak thinking from the internet.
