On free speech
A quick one
Different positions you can take on freedom of speech:
1. Free speech absolutism: untenable, and perhaps *because* it is untenable, it is now forever branded a right-wing, even "far-right" rhetorical weapon rather than the liberal ideal that it ought to be
2. Freedom of speech but not freedom from consequence: understanding that free expression is something that the state facilitates if not guarantees but those expressions can carry certain (legitimate) costs including social costs that the state has no obligation to shield you from and can sometimes even penalise you for, within reason and within the confines of the law
3. Believing that there are some arbitrary standards of acceptability to speech that the state, or even non-state actors must impose, legally or otherwise, because the absence of such standards might amount to perceived inequity and injustice
Only one of these positions is worth holding.