> ban all conservative speech I don't see absolutes in reality very often either (if ever, if anywhere). That's not the issue - which you may not know if your

> ban all conservative speech I don't see absolutes in reality very often either (if ever, if anywhere). That's not the issue - which you may not know if your information sources air gap you from exposure to what gets banned by safely boxing it up as mis/dis/mal-information and move on - "nothing to see here, just fringe lunatics". It's less a "conservative" issue, but can get painted that way because it's circumstantially adjacent at present, but may not be in the future. But more like banning anything opposed to orthodoxy as established/coordinated between government and private institutions. Look at how much speech about COVID was banned that is now reluctantly accepted, and how much is still banned. We all look at this and say disease shouldn't be politicized, but here politics is just a proxy for a core issue of censorship. It's hard to understand how people can call it anything other than censorship as it's mechanically exactly that. See note [1], etc. This classification of mis/dis/mal info also affects political (policy) opinions that are considered "unacceptable", hence the overlap with conservative politics. [1] https://archive.is/PwIQr https://archive.is/PwIQr (https://www.wsj.com/articles/censorship-coordination-deepens-11626474643 https://www.wsj.com/articles/censorship-coordination-deepens...)