[jarfil]

Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves.

If you want to express something I don't like, then I'm not gonna try to silence you, but other than that you're on your own.

[ComputerGuru]

> Yes it does. Free speech means not stopping Nazis from expressing themselves, it doesn't mean you have to help them express themselves.

I'm sorry, but I don't see where @dmerfield says what you are arguing against.

Quoting @dmerfild for posterity:

> No it doesn’t. Free speech means allowing nazis to express themselves so you and others can understand nazism.

---

Interestingly, in most of Europe, "Free Speech" does not include this right. It is pretty uniquely American.

[jarfil]

Let's also quote @empath75 which @dmerfild is answering to:

> Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis.

[jstanley]

Right, but the "Ministry of Truth" isn't about truth either.

Actual free speech would, quite obviously, not depend on the content of the speech.

[kingofhdds]

In general, you are right (excluding the usage of word "Nazi"): private entity can deny services to other entity. However, in legal practice there are exceptions to to the rule, e.g. when the entity which denies is a monopoly (even locally defined), or services are too essential. I'm not in position to decide if it applies to the situation described, but worth keeping in mind that there are limits.

[otterley]

There are no common carriers on the Internet at Layer 7 AFAIK.

[AnaniasAnanas]

> Yes it does

No it does not. The principle of free speech says nothing about who you are forced to do or not do business with. It only affects expression after all.

[jarfil]

So you agree.

[AnaniasAnanas]

I do not agree with "Yes it does" (and thus that "Free speech means no one is forced to do business with nazis"), I agree with the rest however (which is basically the same as what dmerfield said).