This is why Josh will always be a faggot to me. His website has the reputation of being "the last bastion of free speech" and that he will "defend even speech he doesn't like." Anyone who's been around long enough knows this isn't true. He spergbans people all the time,
he can't handle a serious on-topic thread on himself on his own website, will look for reasons to ban you if he dislikes you, and has censored linking to certain websites that make fun of him. While we can't fault the average ignorant person for believing these things unironically, Josh is very happy to take all that positive clout and play up that angle to the public. If by free speech we mean Josh's speech and no one else's these statements would be correct. When Josh is defending free speech, it's his free speech he's defending. To hell with yours.
View attachment 29068
If free speech to him means he can censor and remove whatever he wants on his platforms (this is his actual opinion on free speech) then others are within their right to censor and remove him from their own platforms. However, this statement isn't good at generating positive feelings towards his website and he knows that all too well and if he's honest about what he means when he says free speech he gives his enemies a crucial rhetorical win.