[jlj]

> The western liberal value of free speech has never extended to incitement of violence

Here is the court precedence behind this in the US.

"Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969), was a landmark decision of the US Supreme Court interpreting the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.[1] The Court held that the government cannot punish inflammatory speech unless that speech is "directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action""

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

[wyuenho]

You've said it, this ruling only applies to the government. Private companies are not bound by this case law.

[Qub3d]

Likewise, private companies are not required to host any speech, as long as they aren't discriminatory against a protected class.

Cory Doctrow put it best: Let these companies ban whomever, for whatever (legal) reason. Then, push for anti-trust and decentralization, because the REAL problem is we have an oligopoly controlling social media.