I’ve been thinking of potential measures that corporate-controlled authoritarian governments could use against any kind of left-wing information or organizing, and it seems like an obvious one is a sudden, widespread crackdown on left-wing content. In practice, social media companies would collude with the government to:

  • Wipe out all left-wing social media profiles and ban left-wing rhetoric under the justification that it is “terrorism-related content”.
  • Block access to thousands of left-wing sites at once and de-list them from search engines
  • Update content moderation algorithms to prevent more of this content from being published or recommended
  • Do all of these on the same day to cause the most disorientation and fear
  • Continually go after the hosts of the niche left-wing news and communication channels that still remain, such as small websites, fediverse instances, and encrypted communication channels. Throw their operators in prison and make examples out of them

In effect, due to the centralized nature of social media and news, the online left could instantly be scattered through the collusion of just a few large corporations.

It would:

  • Galvanize the populist right-wing base
  • Stoke feelings of fear, isolation, and hopelessness among the opposition, deterring action
  • Weaken the left’s ability to organize
  • Make it harder for people to learn about real left-wing ideas and stances

Why wouldn’t they take that opportunity?

The bulk of online left-wing activity could instantly be wiped out in a single day. Why am I not hearing more people talking about that? Why do so many left-leaning people think sites like BlueSky will save them? Do they really think they are resisting by using centralized social media platforms? The corporatocracy has complete control over all of the infrastructure…

In my opinion, every influencer on the left should be screaming from the rooftops every single day that the most productive thing you can be doing is talking to people, building connections, and organizing in the real world, because our platform on the Internet could vanish instantaneously.

Anyway, I hope I’m wrong, but it feels like something that could easily happen. What are your thoughts?

  • Hemingways_Shotgun@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 hours ago

    Because as long as they have us convinced that’s it’s “left vs right” than we won’t be unified enough to fight the real war, which is “Corporations vs the rest of us”.

  • Im on mobile so sorry for the basic link and typos. May clean it up later.

    TLDR Mike Masnick has long worked out it is impossible (even with AI) to do content moderation of large social media well. Bad content (nazi rhetoric, Christian nationalism, islamist terrorists signaling each other, CSAM, human trafficking, penis pill ads, auto warranty extensions and so on.)

    So left wing rhetoric will still get through. And far left rhetoric and embarrassing coverage of the elite (e.g. couch fucking) will become popular.

    So bring it!

  • makyo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I think it’s because it’s not even remotely on their radar. They’re fighting a class war and obliterating an opponent that barely knows its fighting. Meanwhile the rest of us are doing a really really good job at dividing ourselves up for them and making their job exponentially easier.

    They love that we’ve bought into the whole left vs. right idea hook line and sinker, what they couldn’t have counted on is how we continued to divide ourselves into smaller and smaller circles that refuse to play with each other.

    Why would they bother silence us when the best we can muster is a bunch of memes and squabbling?

  • 🔰Hurling⚜️Durling🔱@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Think about it like this, for decades they have been moving forward their agenda at a snails pace slowly turning up the temperature of the water. The water has just started to simmer, but if you turn up the heat too suddenly and the water boils too quickly the frog will realize he’s being boiled and fight to escape, however if you keep slowly bringing up the heat as they have all these years, then we (the frog) won’t see it coming and slowly boil to death.

  • stoy@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    17 hours ago

    They have zero reason to stop it, it is that simple.

    Remember that online plattforms earn money through ads and engagement.

    If the last decade has shown us anything it is that online plattforms thrive on division.

  • spacecadet@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Isn’t this exactly what happened to the right? They were kicked off of Reddit and Twitter so they started Truth social? Then Elon bought Twitter and it has being less moderated.

    • orcrist@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 hours ago

      I wouldn’t say it’s been less moderated, but rather moderated differently.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      Then Elon bought Twitter and it has being less moderated.

      didn’t someone recently share a screenshot from there where Muskrat was promoting his “free speech” and someone was silenced for literally saying, “transgender”?

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      11 hours ago

      oppression or pressure from the oppressors.

      companies do stupid shit all the time. they don’t care about customers.

  • sp3ctr4l@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    17 hours ago

    Wanna really decentralize the internet?

    Learn and use I2P.

    Oversimplified: Its a backbone for an internet based off of a p2p, torrent like framework.

    • GreenKnight23@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      11 hours ago

      I thought that protocol sounded familiar. been around since 2002.

      based on java stack…

      anything that keeps java relevant is a no go for me. sorry not sorry.

  • CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Sudden wide-spread crackdowns lead to a lot of backlash. Corporations aren’t going to do this because there’s no legitimate benefit to them for doing it. Additionally, the left-wing gets very little representation in the US at least so why stoke anger and resentment when the right is already controlling everything?

  • WoodScientist@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    17 hours ago

    Honestly, the powers that be probably prefer people have these discussions online. First, most people who post even inflammatory content like Luigi memes are just venting. I’ll make such posts and comments, but honestly, never in a dozen lifetimes am I personally going to attempt to repeat his actions.

    Second, the thing about the Internet is anyone can read it. Machine learning is deployed right now at a vast scale to trawl all corners of the web and find any instances of people actually actively planning acts of revolutionary violence. As tools for plotting actual acts of violence, social media sucks. Luigi succeeded because the whole thing was plotted in the one place the NSA can’t probe - the contents of a single man’s mind.

    Third, you have to look beyond the Day of the Great Banning that you propose. What happens next? Well, tens of millions of disgruntled progressives and leftists are still going to want a place to vent or make their feelings known. And if the Internet is out, that just leaves good old fashioned IRL organizing. And it’s a hell of a lot more difficult to monitor in person groups that do all their activities with pen and paper than it is for bots to monitor social media for potential threats. Also, when people meet in person, they start discussing en masse various means of fighting back, non-violently or violently. People meeting in such groups can also radicalize each other. Someone who once was content just to post a Luigi meme might instead become radicalized and seek to hold in-person protests to call for his pardoning, hold non-violent actions to disrupt the trial, or in the extreme, even form a violent group to try and bust him out of jail. Fewer people will be willing to go up each step of that ladder, but the potential exists.

    Really, social media largely serves the powers that be. It’s like an emergency release valve for society’s collective rage. It doesn’t have no effect, over time it can shift the zeitgeist enough to eventually effect actual government policy. But no one is going to successfully cook up a neo-leninist uprising on any fediverse instance, let alone on Bluesky. In a world of hyper-monitored electronic communication, any real revolutionary acts are plotted in person, on paper, or through entirely private encrypted communications.

  • aesthelete@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    edit-2
    21 hours ago

    It’s impossible to censor everything on the Internet. You can make it more difficult to access stuff you don’t want people to see but it’s ultimately impossible to block it all for everyone.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      20 hours ago

      Exact. It’s wildly more effective to make believe its bad and dangerous so people will police themselves away from it.

  • orcrist@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    20 hours ago

    Mainly because you forgot about the rest of the world. In whatever country you’re thinking of, corporations could try that, and then anyone who was hosted abroad would still be online and everyone could just go access them.

    The other point is that corporations compete against each other. Sometimes they will work together in order to screw over the general public, but they will also work against each other to make an extra buck. That unity that you think exists on the right, it actually doesn’t.

  • bobs_monkey@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Sure they could do that with centralized social media as long as the respective owners are on board, but with the wider internet as a whole it’s not that easy. I’m sure someone that’s more knowledgeable can expand on this, but you’re talking about first identifying all of the sites/domains that need to be blocked (assuming more don’t pop up while you’re tabulating), and then getting every ISP and search provider in the country to simultaneously kill those hostnames in their DNS registers. You’d still have to coerce overseas operators to do the same, or block traffic out of the country (good luck because a, business require international communication, and b, many US based providers serve those outside the US).

    Sure they could (and probably will) do some shenanigans to severely cripple our means of fighting back, but like piracy, this is the internet; we always find a way around their bullshit.

    • j4k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Searching for information is the primary bottleneck. Search engines are not deterministic any more. That means individual targeting is already being done.

      It is a good time to learn about Libreboot, Tails, Tor, and the dark web. A white list firewall is a pain, but not impossible. The pcWRT stuff might be an option for an easier OpenWRT setup if you find it challenging.

      All of this is what Stallman was trying to stop in the first place. Everyone needs to do this stuff too, especially if you have nothing to hide and nothing to lose. By being part of the noise, you are enabling/anonymizing those that are willing and able to take action.