> And it wasn't just extremist groups saying insane shit on TikTok. People were getting harassed through GitHub, issues were being brigaded, tons of big FOSS projects had some big CoC kerfuffle, then there were the master/slave, git master branch, whitelist/blacklist naming things, demanding renaming of projects, demanding people be fired, etc
All of these things you've mentioned were done by private citizens, members of the general public, exercising their free speech, not elected representatives or anyone in the government. You've made an argument against Twitter.
I know that these were done by private citizens. I think you might believe I'm making a point that I'm not.
My point is these things existed and did have actual power. They had sway in private organizations, and even questioning them was enough in some situations to be fired. The current movement is reactionary, and was, like it or not, fueled by distaste for the previous push. A lot of people like to pretend like this came from nowhere, in reaction to nothing, and that's simply not true. People here are claiming that all of the current administration's claims are bald-faced lies, and that's also not true.
I'm a liberal. I've been complaining about the leftist authoritarian push for years, primarily because it was going to create fuel for a powerful right-wing reactionary movement. I'm pretty surprised by the force and extremity of the current situation, but I'm not at all surprised that it's happening.
But these things aren't connected! How is a government department randomly firing federal employees going to stop people asking for codes of conduct to stop sexual harrasment at conferences? Or is the idea simply that by seizing the national microphone, as it were, they're going to take over the discourse? Government as big reality show?
The connection is that the whole culture war is a big part of what got these clowns their votes. I know people who are pretty centrist, wavering on whether to vote for Trump because he'd deal with the "SJW stuff". People who agreed that police brutality against black people was an issue, but were mortified by many of the talking points and activities of BLM protesters (remember when people were taking hostages on college campuses? That was pretty recent).
It was really not long ago when "defund the police" was a contentious issue, and apologists were talking about how "no, they don't mean it literally, it's just to start a conversation", much like how Trump's handlers constantly have to twist his horrible words into something more palatable.
> My point is these things existed and did have actual power. They had sway in private organizations
This is called the marketplace of ideas
Sometimes the marketplace lets stupid things get some sway, and it is up to the marketplace (not the state) to push those aside
> A lot of people like to pretend like this came from nowhere, in reaction to nothing, and that's simply not true
No, I think people are "pretending" like the use of state power is not an appropriate reaction to "overstepping" within the marketplace of ideas, which of course is true. The vast majority of left-leaning people find the blue hairs goofy at best, which is exactly why they do not hold political power. I don't think anyone on the left is "surprised" by what's going on right now, FWIW.
All of these things you've mentioned were done by private citizens, members of the general public, exercising their free speech, not elected representatives or anyone in the government. You've made an argument against Twitter.