The unbanning of Trump feels less like a victory for freedom of speech than a triumph of Silicon Valley Caesarism. It sends the message that it is for these Emperors of the Information Age to decide who may enter the modern arena of discussion, who may have to be expelled, how long they should be expelled for, and under what conditions they may be permitted to return once their punishment is complete.

Indeed, even though Meta’s statement on readmitting Trump to Facebook and Instagram is justified in the language of freedom of speech – ‘The public should be able to hear what their politicians are saying’, it says, with staggering gall, given it spent the past two years preventing the public from hearing what Trump was saying – it also says it will keep a tight leash on Trump. If he violates any of Meta’s protocols, he’ll be suspended again, they warn, for anywhere between one month and two years. So the politician may speak to the people, so long as he says nothing to offend the arrogant hip capitalists who control 21st-century public discussion. Their message is crystal clear: ‘We’re still in control, and we always will be.’ …

Caesars never have to explain themselves. Arbitrariness is their prerogative. Their whims rule. Nothing better captures the unaccountable, undemocratic nature of California’s global system of political censorship than the figure of Nick Clegg.

[My initial response to this is that these platforms are private-sector endeavors, whose owners can set their own terms of service. The problem with that argument, though, is that we have seen government agencies intimidate and/or persuade these platforms to act as their agents in suppressing debate and dissent. The real issue is government co-opting the caesars, although the caesars themselves are a concern too. — Ed]