Or is this like a general US freedom China dictator logic
What matters is that it has the __capability__ of doing it, in ways that would be difficult to detect, when it proves expedient to do so.
This is just not true. There are objective facts eg. the earth is round. We can all agree on this, and any information to the contrary should be banned.
The majority of us agree that racism is bad for society. Racist content should be banned.
Yes there are always going to be humans who think the earth is flat or has a core of cheese, but these people can be relegated to the fringes of society.
The earth isn't round in many ways. It's vaguely spheroid but not a sphere and it has a rough shaped surface.
> We can all agree on this, and any information to the contrary should be banned.
If we can all agree then there is no need to ban anything. By definition, bans for information are means to suppress those who don't agree.
> The majority of us agree that racism is bad for society.
On the contrary, the majority seems to be very happy with racism. They just don't agree who you can be racist towards.
> Racist content should be banned.
I'd rather not have you or anyone else decide what is too racist to say. Especially when existing inforcement shows that "racism" often includes factual but inconvenient information. I do not support banning facts.
> Yes there are always going to be humans who think the earth is flat or has a core of cheese, but these people can be relegated to the fringes of society.
There are many more people that have much more reasonable (and often provably true) views but are going to be targetted with the speech policing your kind wants.
See this 2019 article outlining Chinese Communist moderation policies that (obviously) were attached to the app when TikTok was new, but were removed for non-Chinese user communities.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/sep/25/revealed-...