Here's a hypothetical for you: A few weeks ago, the "anti-fascist" group Smash Racism DC got banned from Twitter after posting videos of their "protest" outside Tucker Carlson's house. Let's say, just for purposes of example, that their leader decided to respond to the ban by handcuffing him- or herself to the front door of Twitter HQ. Would you applaud that? Would you think it was a good idea?

If you don't like that hypothetical, let's try another: Yesterday CNN fired commentator and Christopher Dorner superfan Marc Lamont Hill. CNN hasn't said so explicitly, but the firing was one day after Hill made a speech to the United Nations calling for a "free Palestine, from the river to the sea," parroting the eliminationist rhetoric of Hamas. Let's say Hill handcuffed himself to the front door of CNN HQ to protest his firing. How much would you like that?

I wouldn't like it at all. I hate that stuff. It's ridiculous. You have the right as an American to make a fool of yourself while protesting whatever you want to protest, and I have the right to think you're an attention-craving lamebrain. Put on your pussy hats, yell and scream and throw a tantrum, and keep waiting for me to take you seriously. The only thing you're "raising awareness" about is your complete lack of self-respect.

But apparently I'm supposed to stand and cheer for this:

Doha Madani and Shoshana Wodinsky, NBC News:

Far-right activist Laura Loomer handcuffed herself to Twitter's New York City headquarters for about two hours on Thursday afternoon to protest the company's banning her from the social media platform, then asked police to remove her...

The video stream showed Loomer wearing on her chest a yellow Star of David such as many European Jews were forced to wear during the Holocaust, and a sweatshirt that read on the back, "#STOPTHEBIAS."

Twitter ban = the Holocaust? Well, nobody has ever accused Laura Loomer of having a sense of proportion.

Loomer certainly accomplished her goal, which has always been self-promotion. She pulled a big "Lookit me!" at Shakespeare in the Park last year, and she did it again yesterday. She was briefly the top trending topic on the very social media platform she was protesting, which I guess is an achievement, even if most of the attention came in the form of disdainful mockery:

lol police inform Laura Loomer that Twitter isn't pressing charges and she can stay chained to their door as long as she wants

— Joe Perticone (@JoePerticone) November 29, 2018

Laura Loomer just said if she has to she will pee in her pants.

— Tim Pool (@Timcast) November 29, 2018

Now, was it fair for Twitter to ban Loomer? Probably not. Twitter tends to err on the side of banishment when anyone to the right of Bernie Sanders says anything that pisses off anybody. Loomer was banned for criticizing newly elected Minnesota congresswoman Ilhan Omar, which is a no-no because of Omar's enviable position on the pyramid of victimhood. (She's both Muslim and female, which puts her right at the top.) But Twitter has the right to ban anybody for any reason, and people have the right to express their opinions about it.

And if they make fools of themselves in the process, I'm under no obligation to pretend otherwise.

I spent eight years pushing back against people who claimed any criticism whatsoever of their team was tantamount to treason. A lot of you guys liked it when I spoke out against tribal thinking, until I hurt the feelings of your tribe. Well, I'm not about to stop now.

If you don't like it, feel free to throw a temper tantrum. It sure seems to make Laura Loomer feel better.

P.S. Twitter reinstated Jesse Kelly this week, after banning him for no stated reason. I think that's the right call on Twitter's part, and I also think that if he'd chained himself to Twitter HQ in protest, this post would've been about how dumb that was.