ITT the author completely misses the point.
I don’t think anyone would argue that the people who are saying anything they are saying don’t have freedom of speech. I think they are talking about the spirit of being able to say one’s opinion without fear for one’s safety, or fear of being blocked from voicing one’s opinions.
You are also very wrong to assume that I, the reader, would feel any differently about a Neo-Nazi being given a platform. I would gladly let them talk. I would let Westboro baptist church talk. I would let the anti-trans, anti-gay, anti-human talk. I would think they are a revolting human, but I would let them talk.
There is no discussion to be had about when activists are crossing the line. The line is pretty clear. Debate the people who you disagree with. If you can’t get to them, you can’t get to them. That’s too bad. Hope that you got through to a couple others that were listening. What is so hard to understand about that?
Of course the irony lies that the opposite of these authoritarian censors are those that live and die by granting you your platform. As such they will not censor, and will continually get censored by the opposition.