Revisiting Twitter's Trump Ban
What it means for the balance of power and why the world's political leaders are trembling in fear
Just weeks before the inauguration, Trump's minions threatened the indelicate balance of power in the country. He was condemned for deliberately inciting an insurrection against the government. That's old news, alright. He's no longer swaying his masses online — not through Facebook and Twitter, at least. And America has now sworn in a leader that shines the beacon of hope across the nation.
When Jack Dorsey and Mark Zuckerburg listened to the public's demands and pulled the plug on their former president, the world stood in awe. Liberals rejoiced; Trump's supporters, not so much.
Both execs took action; it's as simple as that. But they also threw a grenade into a fire, igniting a cultural debate that will be unpacked for years to come. A wide range of opinions surfaced online. On one end of the spectrum, their act was the ultimate rendition of heroism. On the other, their jab at freedom of speech bordered on tyrannical. And everywhere in-between lie discussions on their ulterior motives, the possibilities of which are endless.
Distant world leaders immediately felt the urge to voice their opinions on the matter. As the tech giants took concrete actions, they stood in the sidelines, backing the free-speech argument. German Chancellor Angela Merkel denounced the exile as "problematic," seeing as it disregarded the frameworks set by legislators. Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador likened it to the Holy Inquisition. Bruno Le Maire, France's Finance Minister, criticized the "digital oligarchy" for its in-house regulation. The common denominator is obvious: to them, such responsibility should befall the state.
Their words gave us a new enemy; they branded Big Tech as a threat to democracy. And we're very familiar with such Orwellian portrayals of society. Big Brother? No, thank you. Silicon Valley's giants took Trump's seat as the newest scapegoats. Yes, tech companies have been playing us for years now, so they're not exactly innocent. Twitter and Facebook's lack of transparency is indeed preoccupying, but the same can be said of the structures controlled by our political authorities.
Democracy, in its ideal state, has never in fact existed. Its integrity has always been undermined by the hidden plutocracy. Legislative processes are historically biased against the poor, women, people of color, among other minorities. Overall, global political systems are sorely ancient. Built for concerns of the 19th century, they fail miserably at tackling the challenges we face today.
An insignificant portion of the planet's population has full control over the planet's resources, concentrating information, wealth, and power. The asymmetry is far too large. Willingly or not, our political leaders are part of it. That’s why they sided with Trump after the ban; they're terrified of losing their power.
Such a structure is way past its prime. Take Trump's impeachment process. Americans had been begging for him to hit the highway from the get-go. Even though he has been impeached twice, he managed to serve until the end of this term. Legal proceedings were still in place after he stepped down. The ongoing spectacle is a mockery of the public's faith in democracy. Nothing of value seems to ever get accomplished — not through traditional avenues, anyways.
Two tech execs managed to do in one sitting what the people and their political representatives had been trying for years. They got rid of Trump. The implications are obvious: the collapse of an antiquated form of governance is near. No wonder global authorities are scared.
They're hanging by a thread and aren't half as concerned about free speech as they are about looking out for number one. Red-herring at its finest. Trump thought he had immunity, but he was exiled. Carte-blanche is no longer a guarantee. Political authorities didn’t like that, not one little bit.
Societal structures are ill-equipped at accommodating the needs of an interconnected, information-rich humanity. Political figures are lured by band-aid solutions, sacrificing our welfare and that of the planet for short-term approval. They’re allowing infrastructure to deteriorate, sacrificing the national debt to enable tax cuts for the rich, and burning forests in favor of cattle ranching. Don’t even get me started on the corruption.
Politically speaking, we are very much limited in what we can and cannot do. Most of the time, we are expected to cross our fingers in the hopes that our elected officials will at least try to defend some of their promises. It's all up to the executive, legislative, judicial — and economic — branches. For now.
We can no longer bear to passively accept an oppressive, misogynistic reign that deceives us and destroys our planet. Technological progress means democracy can now extend far beyond the confines of a voting booth every four years or so. No more middlemen "representing" our needs. No more façade of participative democracy. Digital progress can allow us to directly partake in policymaking for our countries' most pressing concerns.
Humans have a voice and digital communities mean we can finally start taking matters into our own hands. The Twitter ban showed us we no longer need to sit idly by, waiting for a dead-end ruling. Our collective power in reshaping governance for the modern age is much stronger than the current system. 2020’s Black Lives Matter protests proved so.
Now, it’s not enough to swap one draconian regime for another — in this case, the exchange of big-government-meets-big-corporations for Big Tech. No, no, no. We are witnessing the collapse of a broken system and the dawn of a digital democracy. It's time for us to change the rules of democracy and have it fit our modern days, to allow all of us to participate in a truly equitable fashion. Apart from those who feed off the current system, we are all aching for change, for a sustainable, fair, and digital era.
