With respect, I could not disagree with you more.

Nothing is more fascist than the idea that we should obliterate speech we disagree with. Once you go down this path, you make yourself subject to EXACTLY what we are experiencing now (when the people who disagree with you gain control, you find protest becoming criminalized, words becoming unacceptable, and populism determining acceptable speech).

We defeat bad ideas with better ideas, not censorship.

Also, and perhaps more importantly, your perspective suffers from an enforcement problem. When you push ideas underground, they often become more concentrated and dangerous. Arresting and trying to remove Hitler did not get rid of him (and arguably made him stronger).

By giving so much power to the speech that is suppressed you also create the “forbidden fruit” problem which often makes unacceptable groups and speakers seem more ‘sexy’ and ‘dangerous’ to people who have not yet formulated your own ethical perspective (usually young people).

Yes, many people said after the war, I didn’t fight this war to enable _____ (insert objectionable behavior here). That doesn’t mean that it is a good idea to endorse censorship as a solution to immoral speech acts.

Yes, the internet makes this an even bigger problem, but one of the ONLY places people without power have a chance to have mass access is the internet, regulations are dangerous and must be very carefully considered here.

We live or die by our principles, censorship is NOT an American value or virtue.