I imagine they see it the same way they saw Islamic extremist content on their platforms, in that it's a liability despite the engagement.

And is it those platforms' responsibility to enforce thought-crime intervention anyway?

It's easy after the fact to lay blame, but interfering in discussion, even heated and wild, is an easy slope into censorship and tyranny.

Either all of social media should be white supremacist, holocaust denying 4 Chan, or it is those platforms' responsibility to enforce thought-crime intervention.

This attitude will push normal people to 4chan. We shouldn't be surprised when Racism and Nationalism make a comeback.

So instead of doing that we should just make the whole internet 4chan?

No it won't, not in meaningful numbers. Most people don't want that kind of garbage in their feeds. If they did 4chan would be more popular than Twitter.

Most people don't want to have disgusting, antidemocratic viewpoints forced on them by social media. They want to not see that stuff.

No. What the hell is wrong with all this absolutism. As I mentioned elsewhere, these platforms should have moderation guidelines from the outset that they adhere to. Now they play political games instead.

If a platform is too large to be moderated effectively, there needs to be a discussion about what happens next, which indeed is either free-for-all, clear moderation policy or opaque random and easily biased decisions.

My boomer parents are now asking me about 4chan because of the censorship (someone in the mainstream was talking about it last year.) People are looking and they'll get sucked into this stuff.

Let them try it, they won't even last an hour after seeing the reality of their censorship free "utopia"