Reaction to the actions against Parler is now being viewed as either an attack on free speech by supporters and a necessary step to take away a platform for those seeking to overthrow a democratic country and/or espouse white supremacy views.
“Is it really free speech to say we should take over our government? To take over congress, arrest people, hold them hostage, put bombs around the Capitol Building?” said Medicine Hat College political scientist Jim Groom.
Groom says elected politicians need to weigh the balance of the issues of free speech and extremism on either side of the political spectrum when it comes to lending their credibility as community leaders to social media sites by joining them.
“They may have a certain position that they realize, ‘that’s my position but I can’t go there because I’ll get burned for sure if I go that far,’” he said. “On the other hand, they may say ‘I have to go at least that far in order to win over my constituency.’”
But for at least one constituent of both elected officials, their connection to a social media site – where the commitment to free speech allows unfettered white supremacy sentiments to be spread – is a step too far.
Shila Sharps adds this is especially the case for a person of colour and has her questioning whether Barnes or Turner are people who she can take her constituency concerns to.
“I can’t tell someone not to be a white supremacist but I can ask my MLAs and my local councillor not to support those kinds of sites and realize that we are your constituents and please just be middle of the road when it comes to supporting us,” said Sharps.
Barnes and Turner did not return calls for comment.
Parler has now filed an anti-trust lawsuit against Amazon after the technology giant froze them out of using its servers.
