Comment by jcranmer

If you fear the consequences of your speech, then you are likely to self-censor, and (one can argue) you no longer have free speech. This is the argument that "Free Speech Absolutists" tend to use to justify trying to protect people from the consequences of their speech... which necessarily infringes on others' speech.

You fundamentally cannot enable people to speak without fear without infringing others' right to speak freely. In the context of a government, it is possible (only very barely, and frequently governments are unable to rise to this level) to create systems that punishes neither party and exit any and all attempts at moderation. But when you are running a social media site, this isn't a feasible option, and trying to punish people who are causing fear and limiting free speech will only cause the next wave of free speech sites to arise. Techdirt has a nice article on speedrunning content moderation: https://www.techdirt.com/2022/11/02/hey-elon-let-me-help-you...

Is it a rhetorical sham? Not necessarily, in the sense that I think its proponents could very well believe in what they say. But it is a belief whose consequences hasn't been fully thought-through, and I can't see anyone who still hews to that belief after fully thinking it through.