I realize I kicked up a hornet's nest by accidentally omitting one word: "physical" – I meant to say let's start by stifling speech that directly calls for _phy

I realize I kicked up a hornet's nest by accidentally omitting one word: "physical" – I meant to say let's start by stifling speech that directly calls for _physical_ harm. The next would be maybe an argument of banning speech that _indirectly_ calls for physical harm, since that leaves room for interpretation. Calling for a white ethno-state indirectly calls for physical harm to all non-whites. Why? Because how the hell else are you going to move us out, other than by force? Are you planning to pay each of us $2 million to leave the country? Obviously not. The third would be all other forms of hate speech (which arguably would cause even more debate).