Originally Posted by Sini
I fundamentally disagree with you that censorship is hypothetical. ... I also disagree with you that we can't do anything about it legislatively. We absolutely can and should.


Now you're being inconsistent again. We agreed that regulation of freedom of expression should be limited in application to monopolies. You know, for sake of argument I would love it if you made some absurd suggestion about forcing non-monopolies to give up their freedom of expression. Unfortunately, implying that but never stating it directly leaves you with no actual position we can discuss. This is what I meant when I said "vapid" earlier.

Originally Posted by Sini
Your "the next step" and "the sails of this fascist movement" is a cliche and absurd knee jerk into guilt by association


I'm happy to state this as directly as possible. I'm saying that this argument has no substance, and that authoritarians of all stripes are actively promoting it to further their own cause. I understand you believe your motives are separate. If these words make you feel "guilty," find your resolution in yourself.


Finally...

Originally Posted by Sini
if these people don't have freedom of speech then nobody does. Do you at least agree with me on this proposition?


Yes, I agree. Despite open hostility by many large companies, ultimately all of your examples are enjoying freedom from governmental censorship and the ability to continue to express their ideas. They are not entitled to platform. This is status quo and this is working. Your alternative needs to work better.

[Linked Image]