I think this has the potential to be a major turning point and will be something that is looked back upon in the future. For quite a while now, many of the Silicon Valley tech companies have had a bias against conservative voices. While they are private businesses and are within their rights to do what they want to with their platforms, it sets a dangerous precedent as you can see the near monopoly companies like Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and even Patreon have. More on that in a minute.
As for Sargon, I have watched a lot of his content and in my opinion he is not a racist. While the things he said were inarticulate and poorly chosen in the stream that Patreon is referencing as the reason they are banning him, the context shows that it was not an overt attack against minorities or gay people. In fact it was an attack against the alt right. Sargon is very pro free speech and is anti PC. I believe this is what leads him to sometimes use provocative language to bring attention to the matter.
The things I have the biggest issue with are as follows:
1. Patreon has been very inconsistent with their terms of service. Jack has stated that the TOS is in regard to things that are part of your Patreon account, not outside things. Sargon was banned for something he did on another contributor's channel.
2. Patreon is inconsistent in the application of the TOS. You can find examples on Patreon of users using the same words as Sargon but with clear racist intent. Many of those users have not been banned. This is similar to how Twitter and Youtube will allow Antifa to call for violence and not be banned while their right wing equivalent is banned.
3. Patreon could have simply issued a warning stating that the behavior was unacceptable and if it happened again there would be a suspension. They also dropped the ball with the way they handled communication and transparency.
Ultimately these companies should establish guidelines that are clear and equally applied to everyone. If someone is suspended or banned, they should be able to point specifically to the rule that was broken and their should be due process.
I think this a great opportunity for a new alternative to emerge that can give the Silicon Valley companies some good competition. A platform based on free speech and equal opportunity for left and right alike would be quite welcome. The system works best when ideas from both sides of the aisle can be brought up and discussed in a reasonable manner. The only speech that should be banned is that which specifically incites violence. Everything else should be out in the open. If it is bad, lets discuss it and help people understand why it is bad. Context matters too. Joe Rogan brought up a great point about how people are now getting offended by sounds. The context in which words are spoken clearly matters. We need to look at the intention of the words. What was the person trying to say or do?
I think someone like Sam Harris taking the principled stand to walk away from Patreon is a big deal. He doesn't see eye to eye with Sargon but can see that what Patreon is doing is not good. He is taking a risk and leaving a lot of money on the table. Patreon will now have to look at their actions in regard to Sargon which seem to be motivated not by what is best for business but what is best for their political position. This move has cost them a lot of money. In the end, will they deem it worth the loss of revenue to deplatform someone they don't agree with based on a video from nearly a year ago?
"There are things which, if done by the few, we should refuse to imitate; yet when the majority have begun to do them, we follow along - just as if anything were more honourable because it is more frequent!"
-Seneca
