First Amendment in Peril?
There is never an absolute and total freedom of speech. That is, there is always speech of the kind than a society cannot and must not tolerate.<p>Either a country accepts this <i>within</i> its legal framework and has e.g hate speech laws (e.g Germany) or it doesn&#x27;t (e.g US), but in the latter case as being &quot;outside&quot; the law - and it must be met with force outside the law.<p>There are benefits and drawbacks to both models (which is why both exist). But at the end of the day there is little practical difference between &quot;if you carry a nazi flag you&#x27;ll go to jail&quot; and &quot;if you carry a nazi flag you&#x27;ll be punched in the face&quot;.<p>In both cases open society is judging and delivering the sentence.<p>The notion that all speech must be accepted and never met with violent protest is both unrealistic and dangerous.<p>So to get back on topic: 1st amendment protects the open society but doesn&#x27;t function without an open society. Violent protestors at rallies and tech companies gagging fascists is what it needs, and not a problem.