Not to mention, it just means extremists go to platforms that welcome them (Voat, Gab and others). That means platforms that use to have a big mix of views, like Reddit, are now horribly one sided and those other platforms are all extremist.
Keep in mind, we're not seeing the "right" or "moral" view. We're seeing Twitter/Facebook/Reddit's CEOs/Mods/deciders views.
Banning such discussion very soon precludes any disagreement with increasingly narrow set of orthodox doctrines. Of course, Twitter has fully legal right to do exactly that - but what's the use of such platform? And if all major platforms do that - what happens to the society where important questions can not be publicly discussed?
In your example no one is going to get banned for that, but they will get banned if after getting blocked they create a harassment campaign of hundreds of people to repeatedly tell the person their religion is bunk. There is no "discussion" there, it is purely for harassment reasons.
No we haven't. We've seen white supremacy being legitimized at the highest levels, and as a result white supremacists claiming to be "victims" openly because they feel emboldened by the election of white supremacist politicians.
Nah disagree there. We'll see if Facebook starts arbitrarily banning libertarian content or whatever, but I don't think this spells the doom that conservatives think it will for the bits of their ideology that aren't racist.
This is the world Muslims deal with every day - radical Islamic terrorism gets shouted about, and suddenly Muslims have to say "so er, we're worried about being labeled as terrorists just arbitrarily." Way I see it this will help, because another class of people will now be aware of that distinction issue and perhaps be more sensitive to the differences between, say, a Muslim and a radical Muslim terrorist.
And even there it is debatable - does saying "people with pale skin are better at producing vitamin D in low-light conditions than people with dark skin" make me a white supremacist?
(Or perhaps people need to become more accepting of a distinction between better at x and better. Michael Phelps is certainly better at swimming than I am, but that is mostly orthogonal to whether he is a better person than I am)
Stop making bad imaginary corner cases and stick to the actual problem.
That is precisely the actual problem--the term is loosely defined and thus lends itself to partisan equivocation. For example, lots of people assert that the MAGA hat is a symbol of white supremacy (and indeed it is, albeit only for those people who sincerely believe it to be).