> Free speech absolutism is possible and is beneficial The jury is out for me, how can we say it's automatically beneficial if it's not sacred and only a mean

> Free speech absolutism is possible and is beneficial The jury is out for me, how can we say it's automatically beneficial if it's not sacred and only a mean to an end for society/people, that end depending on your views (GDP, happiness, sustainability...)? Also IMHO like any liberal absolutism, the forces will inevitably make who has the more money own and game the system, it's a proxy for Oligarchy. It can be good but only under certain philosophical positions and economic theories that not everyone agree on.