This is a slippery slope that people somehow either conveniently forget the nature of; are willfully ignorant of; or don't see over the horizon of roses for. L

This is a slippery slope that people somehow either conveniently forget the nature of; are willfully ignorant of; or don't see over the horizon of roses for. Let's take eugenics as an example (intentionally controversial given you brought up the Nazis); and in this example all we're doing is replacing "voice/free speech" with "eugenics". Everyone agrees someone policing who gets to reproduce or not is a bad idea because such policing is impossible to do objectively/fairly/morally/ethically. Why is such policing any easier or less important for political views and discussion? It's not. Policing people's opinions and silencing, censoring, or removing content is just as impossible. Is some message a very out of taste troll, sarcasm, some inside joke, intentional smearing, discussion of a controversial topic? Well, any sense of objective discussion there goes out of the window because a _human_ has to police it and until we can quantify with exact precision and accuracy through a machine the meaning behind human communication (we can't yet(?)) this is an impossible (for now) problem to solve. We cannot even ask Siri/Alexa to do complicated tasks.