Said normie-baiter was among many engaging in anti cancel-culture cuckery we've witnessed over the past 2 weeks. Before, he's said this line of thought regarding publisher vs platform distinction, that the right only wanting control when they're in power. This point has been made too about boomer moral police and SJWs, at least by other people.

There is a circumstantial difference between supporting the strengthening the DMCA provision of platform vs publisher (right-wing commentators never frame it this way because how unpopular the DMCA is with tech-savvy gen-x/millennials), and the application of cancel culture against leftnuts. Unlike the platform vs. publisher distinction (or Reagan-Right moral panics vs SJW moral panics), there's a general understanding that cancel culture is bad, and that the effective tool we have to fight fire is fire. Hans-Hermann Hoppe calls this estoppel, where an individual or group cannot go back in their word without punishment or ejection. This forum and other places have discussed this point enough in the recent weeks, and I expect most here are already familiar beyond what I've typed up here.

With the anti big-tech platform vs publisher distinction that was being primarily publicized from the 2010s-2022, there was very little acknowledgement of the unintended consequences. Chiefly the loss of freedom of of independent internet hosts, and the ability of big tech companies to hijack these regulatory frameworks. There's also the lack of a bright-line distinction between spam prevention, algorithmic recommendations, and algorithmic meddling in support of the Democratic party. This was the right-wing version of the FCC fairness doctrine progressive weirdos evangelized in the 90s and 00s. Maybe some right-wingers had the eventual goal of dismantling the DMCA, if they even thought about it, when supporting the platform vs. publisher distinction against big-tech, but certainly not the Daily Wire.

This youtuber would be right if he attempted good-faith pursuit of first-principles, in the subject of society/politics/economics. Anyone who believes in the mainstream cases for anti-trust, minimum wage, or EU "prosumerism" does not fit in this category. He's not educating his audience on the intricacies of regulatory capture, and common misconceptions of the general public. He's doing low-effort entertainment on the culture war for views.