Missing from this discussion is the understanding that speech is an inalienable right. It does not need to be justified on consequentialist grounds, nor on the

Missing from this discussion is the understanding that speech is an inalienable right. It does not need to be justified on consequentialist grounds, nor on the basis of the more pernicious metric of harm reduction. Pointing a gun at someone to silence her is a form of censorship, and so is quietly erasing her from the most prevalent communications channels (deplatforming). Figure out a way to achieve harm reduction without grotesque violations of natural rights. Until then, there will always be people who prefer dangerous speech to the safety of slavery.