I dunno...when you go onto a website like MFK...or Twitter...or any other social medium...are you not essentially visiting someone else's house? Those websites are private property, and the people or organizations who pay for them and maintain them also exert control over what is allowed to be said or shown on them, and to whom. What's wrong with that? Don't like the way we do things? There's the digital door!
I want control over my property...I don't allow free access to anyone off the street...and the people I do invite or allow to visit are expected to adhere to the rules of conduct which I arbitrarily set. I monitor what goes on here at home, I watch visitors to ensure they behave, and I have no problem "suspending" someone (maybe it's time for you to leave now), "banning" someone (get the hell off my land and don't come back!) or exerting perhaps more subtle control (maybe you've had enough...how about a cola without rum this time?).
I sure don't believe those other folks should have access to the "tools" I might use to enforce the rules on my own property...just as I don't expect to have free access to their tools.
If you think this means the system is "rigged at the top", it appears as if you are assigning a very nefarious-sounding name to a simple fact of life that should be obvious to all.
The solution is simple: set up your own public medium, set your own rules...as many or as few as you wish, you can always change your mind about the details later...and let chaos reign. I wonder how long it would take before you are forced to take a step back and start to consider exerting some control; maybe ask Elon Musk for some pointers on the steps to take?