I don't think, however, that there ever has been a time when so many have been so open, so organised and in such huge numbers.
I suppose it doesn't matter whether we're just now learning their numbers or whether their ranks swelled in the Trump years. Either way there are too many of them, and they're emboldened and more overtly organized. The racist and nationalist sentiments have been there all along. Now these groups are free to shamelessly express them, with aid and comfort from prominent figures in the Republican Party.
If Sen. McConnell's statements yesterday in the Senate are a strong enough indication, Donald Trump might have no future in the party. But yesterday Trump was babbling about starting his own party. And I imagine it will be populated largely by hate groups and deplorables.
[People] are using these platforms to spread targeted messages of chaos and distrust.
And for a kaleidoscope of reasons, the companies that operate them haven't been compelled to do anything about it. Early on, they were just naive tech giants. And yes, there's a certain naivété at work. "We're just a fun platform where people can come together," and the real product is the social connectivity data that's generated. Or ad revenue. Or a combination of many such factors. When platforms like Facebook and Twitter came about, the companies had no idea what to do with all the problems that come with increasingly easy interaction with strangers. So they completely ignored them, downplayed them, and literally expected the problem to just go away. They were all nerds. They had little idea how the world worked outside Silicon Valley. There have been a couple good books written on this.
Nowadays it seems like the various social media companies are well aware of the political and social influence they have, and especially their ability to drive or respond to large trends. And it seems that all they see, without additional oversight, is profit. I think they've gone from being naive to being happy in a new role as power brokers. They lack either the will or the technical ability to stop their platforms being used to create propaganda under the guise of "free speech." Only when it seems they might incur regulation or be sued do they take steps to actually look at how their product behaves and creates a social "reality" for people. The remedy, such as it is, is always too little, too late, and with too little enthusiasm. As long as eyeballs are looking at their product, they try to squeak by with the minimum responsibility.
Trump's pardoning of Steve Bannon is a terrible decision. Personally I think that Bannon is one of the most dangerous men on the planet.
He is truly an odious man. And consider what he was pardoned for. Bannon told Trump's followers he was taking up a collection to fund the border wall with Mexico privately. And then used the money for other purposes. Now normally if I had a group of followers, and someone was doing something that might alienate them from me, like using my name and reputation to defraud them, I'd normally be very anxious to stop that happening, so it would protect my reputation.
Former President Donald Trump has done this to the effect of condoning the fraud. But of course his followers probably won't believe that. They'll argue that Bannon was being unjustly prosecuted and that he's a great American patriot and hero, and here, have some more of my money.
Let's hope this comes back to bite him in the behind. Now pardoned, Steve Bannon cannot plead the Fifth Amendment for evidence he might given on any federal charges against Donald Trump that might involve Bannon's exculpated crimes.
