I’m gonna go a different direction here.

Silencing propaganda is how it expands more.

You cannot stop propaganda. Some of it will always get in. Banning the position being propagandized demands that observers choose sides. Some portion of those people are going to actively seek out the propaganda message to “make an educated decision” (bOtH sIdEs) Some portion of those people are going to buy into the propaganda.

On the other hand, if propaganda is not silenced, the response will be one of showing it to be bunk. This would serve to make the propaganda less effective. Yes, some people will still buy into it, but fewer people than if it had been silenced.

Think about it like scam emails. You can see by the awful grammar and spelling and nonsense email address that it’s bullshit. The people who respond don’t. They are more likely to fall for it. Silencing propaganda in one place doesn’t silence it everywhere, but it does focus its message to people who are more likely to fall for it. They can then strengthen each other’s belief by association, and begin expanding on their own.

It’s why the big picture is that it’s one giant propaganda machine, but when you look closer, it’s a bunch of loosely or unrelated local “cells,” operating independently. Oath Keepers, Proud Boys, Patriot Front, plenty of others nobody had heard of, and the (as yet) less violent collections like Tea Party, Freedom Caucus.

It is far better to answer propaganda than to silence it, but we do all have to agree, as individuals, that that’s what we do. The far-right has already decentralized, and reasonable people need to do the same thing. You don’t have to be a registered Democrat, you don’t have to approve of Biden; you can still contribute to having decisions in government made on the basis of objective reality. You may still not like the decisions made, but your differences will be political ones, and not ones of fact (for the most part).

Luckily, all it takes is standing up for your principles.