I've been a long time participant in r/libertarian, but have noticed that there's been a fairly substantial shift in the content over the past 2-3 years, and lately it's full on anti-statist / end democracy content only.

I was recently permanently banned without any stated cause or warning. The moderators have not responded to my polite request for the cause of the ban.
I suspect it was because I posted a link to a news article and was critical about economics, which is a foundational principle of libertarianism. But this is hardly a permanent-ban worthy item, unless: they're actively attempting to permit posts from a few vocal posters on anti-statist / end democracy content. Looking at the recent posts, it appears that there's about 10 users who post constantly on such topics.

How is this related to free speech? When you create a space for content, and you have a set of guidelines for said content, there's an expectation that you would be able to freely participate within the confines of those guidelines. When there are, however, secret rules that are zealously enforced by moderators with secret agendas, your speech may appear to be free (within the bounds set by the subreddit rules), but in actuality you're being secretly silenced without anyone else being the wiser. There's zero transparency in the moderation process of that sub, so such silencing isn't designed to reinforce rules, but rather to quell non-conforming content. Some subs used to maintain a ban list and reason for banning, I don't see that anymore anywhere, which is unfortunate.

The analogy is not unlike what happens to dissidents in authoritarian regimes.
"You have the freedom to say whatever you want ... (as long as it doesn't offend the overlords.)"

Just to strengthen any Rule 1 concerns, yes, I'm stating that there's "broad censorship", but it's also being done in direct contravention to the publicly stated allowable content of that sub, and users who are acting in good faith are being silenced who don't adhere to the (apparently) secret rules.

"This decision means that Ghassan’s freedom of expression and freedom of movement are no longer under threat, and he can speak out about what he witnessed in Gaza. This victory cannot be overstated.”

https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/palestinian-surgeon-ghassan-abu-sittas-schengen-wide-travel-ban-overturned

https://thehackernews.com/2024/03/us-court-orders-nso-group-to-hand-over.html

But of course they wont say what exactly I said that warranted the block.

I have been kicked out of Yahoo and Reddit also.

X is the only one that has left me alone.

During the Covid era a lot of people that held views opposite of the established narrative were being censored. It was said that misinformation was killing and harming people, but it turns out that a lot of the people that were being silenced and oppressed were actually right. One of the most notable examples of this is Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, coauthor of the Great Barrington Declaration, who to his own account lost nearly 30 pounds of body weight as a result of the anxiety caused by what he calls "the inquisition".

It is fair to assume, that the pressure on this man was so intense mostly because other voices were not allowed and even forbidden to be heard. If the censorship on internet platforms such as Twitter hadn't been so bad, maybe a lot of harm could have been prevented and more doctors, scientists and experts would have stood by the side of Dr. Bhattacharya, who not only showed courage but also true virtue by standing up for what he believed in.

LGBTQ

We saw also, that this censorship led to less free speech in other areas, such as the topic of gender and LGBTQ. People that held conventional views based on biology were unrightfully banned and punished. While we did see bullies being punished on the side of the conservatives, bullying from the side of the of the trans community was met with a closed eye. As a result of this biased censorship on Twitter and other platforms, the trans hype could spread deeply into society without being met with proper criticism as many critics were cancelled causing many others to stay silent due to the peer pressure.

Since the takeover of Twitter, now X by Elon Musk we've seen a balancing of forces once again. Voices that were quenched are now able to speak up and soon we will see the effects of this in society. That's why I predict that the trans hype will die out very quickly. Data about suicide rates as well as detransitioners speaking up is about to reach the general public, putting those that once affirmed these beliefs to shame and causing serious offenders such as medical professionals to be punished.

With this change of powers, I also see a grave danger. As of right now I sense that the opposing forces are in balance, but with the narrative of the trans identity being something precious and divine crumbling more and more, we will see those on the side of the previously oppressed becoming more and more oppressive. We will also see a demand to censor misinformation from some of those that previously suffered from censorship themselves, proving that they have not quite learned their lesson.

If that happens, I sense that lives might be in danger. People of the trans community could be targeted more and more by bullying and may even be driven into suicide, which is not right and should be prevented, if possible. With their community becoming smaller and smaller, protection of singular individuals by the collective will also lessen, allowing outside forces to quickly make advances and cause harm.

My warning

During these last years a lot of lives were lost. Viktor Frankl wrote in his Opus Magnum that the best did not survive. I dare not regard my fate as equal as the terrible suffering that this inspiring man had to endure, but I dare to say that during a crisis of great magnitude it is indeed those with the kindest souls that pass away early, such as my mentor, Gunnar Kaiser.

A lot of people also grew numb to the abuse they had to endure, and thus it is my estimation that many among the just and meek are not capable of speaking up against injustice to the same degree as they once were.

As of right now, I do not believe society as a whole is ready for unrestricted free speech. I'd advise to observe the extremists on both sides of any topic carefully, making informed and collusive decisions to censor radicals, if necessary. The societal resistance to radical ideas and extremism is a lot weaker than it used to be and I reckon that it will take up to 5 years to achieve self regulating levels. If censorship is indeed to be applied, I recommend using warnings before banning and temporary bans with public reasoning. This way, unjust and arbitrary abuse of power may be criticized, allowing any authority to correct their course, implying they are self reflecting enough. Censorship is only to be used as a scalpel, never as a broadsword, as the damage that is inflicted by blind swings may cause serious harm to the organism that is our social well being.

The goal should be to allow free speech to prosper. This is a difficult process and free speech shouldn't be viewed as a total state, rather a spectrum. Just as democracy is not a total state, but an ideal worth pursuing. Unfortunately if something is precious, it's very often also quite fragile, which is why caution is to be advised.

Thank you for reading, and have a nice day.