Except the end result is the same. The government gets to censor the public. "Voluntarily" going along with it doesn't change that fact, and it certainly doesn't change their intentions.
If it were jackboot thugs smiling and having a good time cracking skulls because their boss ordered them to squash a legitimate peaceful protest, no one would be cutting them any slack at all or pretending "cooperating" is just a coincidence.
That's a dishonest take and you know it.
It's a distinction without a difference.
Its a fundamental distinction if you want to succeed in suing the DNC or the government
Except the end result is the same. The government gets to censor the public. "Voluntarily" going along with it doesn't change that fact, and it certainly doesn't change their intentions.
I suppose that's a fair observation. It would mean Twitter was a willing participant rather than coerced, which makes their actions worse.
It's still the government issuing orders though.
If it were jackboot thugs smiling and having a good time cracking skulls because their boss ordered them to squash a legitimate peaceful protest, no one would be cutting them any slack at all or pretending "cooperating" is just a coincidence.