| It is absolutely reasonable to expect that freedom of speech involves the preservation of being able to make basic purchases. This "freedom of speech isn't freedom of consequences" line is exactly the sort of attitude people take in the countries in which the government does suppress free speech, and they think it's just perfectly fine. You have freedom of speech and every country then, the consequences just going to jail. There's a limit to this. There should be consequences for you saying things that are wrong, lying to people, spreading hatred, and so on. However, protecting basic human decency in the ability to continue to participate in society is incredibly important to preserving free expression across our nations. Being able to purchase things, being able to post to the internet, are both aspects of this. It's fine to have this attitude when they're is a strong diversity of companies that allow you to participate and is likely that not all of them can collude with each other. We have two payment processing companies. Four social media companies, and those four all literally live in the same city. The patj you tread is a path leading to suppression of speech, and the point of free speech is to ensure that people are able to speak without fear of undue consequence. |
There is even old communist-era joke about that:
Is here in USSR the same freedom of speech like in western countries?
Yes, there is freedom of speech, but in western countries there is also freedom after speech.