[KozmoNau7]

Read what I wrote. I am 100% for free speech, it is one of the most important aspects of any free society.

However, freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences. If you make public speeches calling for the violent persecution of immigrants, there will be consequences for you. Yes, even in the US.

[Fins]

But that's not the question. The question is who decides, and how, what speech should have (negative) consequences. If I am reading you correctly, you are saying that you will provide consequences to those who you deem to be calling for something you do not agree with.

Another one of the most important aspect of the free society is the rule of law. Not vigilante justice.

[KozmoNau7]

Ideally, the rule of law decides.

Unfortunately it very often is susceptible to political and economic influences. And the courts are not in the streets, where the attacks happen. Far too often the police turn a blind eye to right wing incitement and violence (due to a large number of sympathizers in the police), so sometimes direct action is the only way to show fascists and other hatemongers the error of their ways.

[js8]

"sometimes direct action is the only way to show fascists and other hatemongers the error of their ways"

Unfortunately, the actual history shows that doesn't show them the error, but is more likely to increase the resentment and resistance.

[KozmoNau7]

Unfortunately, direct and sometimes violent action is the only language fascists seem to understand.

[Fins]

And again, are we to assume that it is you who will decide who is a fascist and who is not?

And why such a discrimination of communists, who are far more deadly and dangerous than any "fascist" (your Soviet terminology is showing; surely you mean nazis of different stripes, not comparatively vegetarian Italians).

[KozmoNau7]

Despite what my username may imply, I'm not Russian nor a supporter of the USSR.

Fascists are a very real problem today. Communists are not.