[rmatt2000]

You should spend some time on a college campus. Shouting down speakers and deplatforming non-progressives is more common than one might think.

[slg]

People on HN and in this thread in particular have such a one sided view of this issue. For some reason people here only think the left is attacking free speech when the truth is that free speech is under attack from both the left and right. One of those two has been much more effective translating these attacks into laws which I would expect to be the most concerning for proponents of free speech and yet it is always "what is happening on college campuses" that scares people more than "what is happening in state legislatures".

[lettergram]

While I agree-ish, I can list a litany of people deplatformed. All of them are on the right. It could just be only the left has power at the moment.

A common question is why the Ayatollah is on Twitter (and I think Facebook) calling for death, but Alex Jones isn’t allowed to question events.

We can argue both are reprehensible, but only one is banned.

Beyond that I haven’t seen anyone on the right truly call for limitation of speech. I’ve only seen them get upset when something is particularly targeting them (say the push for LGBT in elementary schools)

[remarkEon]

Which laws have passed that restrict speech?

[whimsicalism]

This also has to do with platforming.

And it's not just about progressives, my university (Harvard) disinvited a progressive speaker after pressure from the CIA.

[the_only_law]

Who was it?

[coeneedell]

I don’t see how this is inconsistent with what they’re saying. These people are asking their colleges to not provide a platform, not that the speakers should not be allowed to speak anywhere.

[OrangeMonkey]

Colleges are public locations that have historically allowed free speech. Court cases have been tried and lost trying to restrict this free speech.

I think then you see the issue - "These people are asking their colleges to break the law and restrict the speech of others."

You can argue that the laws should be changed to stop the current concept of free speech though.

[citizenkeen]

That is perfectly in line with freedom of speech. Is the government showing up and arresting the speakers? No? Then freedom of speech is intact.

[glerk]

I’m so tired of this argument. Who cares if it’s the government, private business, or other citizens who do the censorship? The result is the same: censorship. Next you’re gonna tell me to go build my own university/social media platform/payment processor/ISP/etc. if I don’t like it.

[ratsmack]

Any collage or institution receiving government funding must not censor speech in any form, as they are government institutions via proxy. Also, in my opinion, all publicly traded companies should not be allowed to censor speech as they are essentially "owned" by share holders, not the management team.

[hackinthebochs]

There really ought to be a copypasta to respond to this "free speech = 1st amendemnt" trope.

[jlawson]

This is like saying lynchings aren't oppression because it's not the government that did them.

[mc32]

It’s not. If another form of government were to take over and decide that progressivism is dirty and society takes the cue, that’s not freedom of speech. It’s insidious censorship none the less

[cortesoft]

Isn’t shouting down speakers just another person exercising their free speech?

[1270018080]

Yes.

[uoaei]

What you describe is people exercising their free speech.

[ModernMech]

Isn’t shouting an exercise of speech?

[cies]

Exactly, not being able to put a giant sound system in the city center blasting rave is hampering my freedom of expression!

So there are many rules that have always limited expression.

[xenospn]

Maybe if they’d done so sooner we wouldn’t have had the KKK.