<i>You are rather proposing a vast curtailment of personal freedom, according to your personal interpretation of reified &quot;democratic and humanist values&quot; -- an extremely vague and nebulous concept</i><p>Not at all nebulous. Members of an intellectual, tolerant, multicultural society tolerate all those they practically can, and seek to talk to convince and listen to learn. Members of intolerant groups seek to silence, shun, and otherwise punish their perceived enemies. It&#x27;s quite intuitive, commonsense, and plain as day.<p><i>private entitites ought to be so regulated by your own arbitrary philosophical restrictions</i><p>Really, I&#x27;d much rather that society at large understood these distinctions of philosophical and emotional self awareness, and enacted them of their own free will. This is why I make such comments. I&#x27;m trying to convince people that the freedom to act like a uber-jerk to people you don&#x27;t like isn&#x27;t an obligation to do so. Also, it&#x27;s generally a bad idea.<p><i>This is no different in character from any other totalitarian dictatorship</i><p>Very different. There&#x27;s a lot more listening and talking involved, and far fewer dictates. What&#x27;s more like a dictatorship? Someone advocating for tolerance, or someone angrily insisting on their right to excommunicate people? In any case, thanks for revealing in what direction you&#x27;re emotionally invested.