At some point you're going to have to actually face the fact that your approach to politics only works if you're a cuck who accepts the status quo or use silly deflections to distract yourself from being a cuck.

Wait a minute...capitalism has been cheating on me?!

I'm filing my divorce papers right now...as long as I can keep my salary and my Mercedes...

Cuck it is.

:laughing:

You may find this hard to believe, but sometimes even businesses that make money are regulated.

How you gonna police politicized speech when it will disproportionately affect one side more than the other?

You don't. You police things like falsehoods, hate speech and the like.

When all of that disproportionately affects one political side more than the other my question remains unchanged.

Remember that however you feel about political discourse in the US, the US is only part of Facebook's market. They have many more users in India than in the US. And the way you feel about political discourse in the US isn't necessarily true of everywhere else. It's not true here.

But where hate speech and weaponizing falsehoods are important tools in political discourse, I'd simply say they shouldn't be. We can say these are things that affect society in a bad way, no matter who wields them, so attacking those things isn't political in itself. At least I don't think of it that way.

If the environment changes, like the way you express your political opinions is moderated or censored, I think the best thing in this case would be to adapt to the changing environment and then express political views in a different, less harmful way.

This is ignoring my point. Facebook is an American company who will be regulated by American lawmakers. Look at the recent history of America and tell me how we're going to pass laws to stop Facebook from spreading misinformation about vaccines and stolen elections.