Josh Hawley, a Missouri Republican, is becoming a rising star in the GOP by taking on big tech. As the youngest member of the Senate, Hawley appears a rare member of Congress actually capable of discussing tech issues in a competent way. His latest foray into the issue is the introduction of new legislation that attempts to regulate away political bias in social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook.

The frustration many conservatives such as Hawley harbor toward the undeniably biased and progressive Silicon Valley is completely understandable. It’s easy to see why some believe the government should step in and do something about the overt ideological favoritism that the companies running our modern-day digital public squares exhibit. However, this isn’t the correct approach, for a whole host of reasons.

Yet I’d like to focus on one particular counterpoint that’s often made by those on the Right who endorse measures such as regulating tech companies as utilities or applying the First Amendment to private digital platforms. It usually goes something like this: “Libertarians and free market conservatives are fine with having their rights trampled as long as it comes from Mark Zuckerberg and not a government official.”

But I have yet to meet anyone on the right who is “fine” with having these social media platforms exhibit clear bias or ban people for wrongthink. We simply think there are other ways to address the problem that don’t require trusting the octogenarians in the Senate to craft new tech regulations and keep up with evolving technology.

Secondly, any trivialization of the threat posed by government power is bizarre and concerning.

It’s true that in our modern digital age, being kicked off platforms such as Twitter, Facebook, or YouTube is disastrous. Whether you’re a public figure or just a regular person, this censorship can severely restrict your ability to communicate with family and friends, express your beliefs publicly, or even just to connect with people you find interesting. You can essentially be barred from the public discourse in most meaningful ways by a few executives at big tech companies.

However, there are lots of ways these Silicon Valley companies can’t hurt you. Twitter can’t send armed men to your house to take you away and throw you in a cage. The government can. Facebook can’t forcibly seize your money or land for what it deems to be a “greater good” without any consent or objection on your part. The government does this, taxing you at will and is always able to engage in eminent domain or civil asset forfeiture.

YouTube can’t surveil your every move. But our various intelligence agencies sure do.

Conservatives used to understand that there is one single force that most threatens our life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness — the state. Now it seems many are forgetting this fundamental truth. The actions of these social media companies are certainly concerning, and we need to address them. But as this debate grows more and more prevalent, let’s discuss our options on their merits and potential effectiveness. Don’t trivialize the power of the government and minimize the threat it can pose.

Dylan Housman is a senior at the University of Maryland and president of the UMD College Republicans.