>His vision where everyone's opinion and speech has equal weight doesn't come close to the reality of the situation in America today, where those with financial

>His vision where everyone's opinion and speech has equal weight doesn't come close to the reality of the situation in America today, where those with financial wealth can effectively pay to amplify viewpoints they favor. That's absolutely correct, but let's take it to its logical conclusion: entire American sub-societies with financial wealth can effectively pay to amplify viewpoints they favor, as they can better afford the shortfall that comes when their cultural values and reality don't mesh- throwing out competent people for inconvenient political viewpoints or weird kinks is not something a society that actually had to compete could afford to do (remember, the Civil Rights Acts and Sexual Revolution happened at a time when the whole country had more jobs than people to fill them). And every society with a surplus does the same thing- for example, China can afford to (and routinely does) kill any political dissident because of its manpower surplus. This is why everyone in America (if not the entire world) knows the opinions and values of one or two particular anti-freedom American subcultures, but not as much what Americans (as a whole, outside of one's subsociety) value. I hope the other subcultures will be smart enough to present a common pro-freedom message, but I fear they will not.