Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's only repressive government moderation when someone else does it. When it happens in the US, it's "policing hate speech".
That's a fair argument but only if you embrace the logical conclusion of the stance you are taking. If you are arguing for unbridled free speech then fair enough (Personally I wouldn't but we can have that conversaion). If however you have your own feelings about sane limits on free speech - then you can't take this position without someone else using your argument against you. It's fine to make these kind of grand s…
It's just words. Sticks and stones... What I see on social media platforms is a UX made to require moderation. Once upon a time, the user had the power to ignore people with the click of a button. "Don't feed the troll" was common wisdom. If Alex Jones or anyone else said something you didn't like, you just ignored them and never hear them again.
All the "gamification" of social media made everyone participating in social media into "gamers" who throw tantrums and their little joysticks when they "lose" points. Just like when you got your ass beat playing Mortal Kombat. Then moderators, like parents, come in to scold you and give you a timeout/suspension/whatever.