In reply to Chive Talkin\':
I wonder how he would feel if Borat was censored due to its portrayal of Kazakhstan? Or Bruno for his caricature of gay Austrians? Given the trajectory or public sensitivities, there's a good chance his character will, in a few years, also qualify as hateful, racist, of spreading false-hoods, and being as off-colour as black-minstrel shows. Propose censorship as a solution and you open a pandora's box and I'm not convinced he's is in a great position to start passing judgement.
He complains about democracy being in retreat, but proposes censorship as a solution? Because "hate crime is on the rise"....really? https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/10/is-hate-crime-really-on-the-rise
How Facebook is supposed to police hundreds of thousands of posts is beyond me. Algorithms already used by Google and Facebook result in daily demonetisation and removal of perfectly legitimate content, on claims of inciting hatred. You can be damn sure that in removing "immoral" content a hell of a lot of innocent content will be removed as well and given social media monopolies appear strongly politically aligned how can that be a good thing?
Yet another claim of "this is what the Nazis would do" seems like scare-mongering and an apparent inability to accept that what currently qualifies as extremist, Nazi and racist (be that Trump, Boris, Brexit or border-walls) might be entirely legitimate. If your idea of democracy is that these things are such negative outcomes that they should be inhibited, by censorship or limiting the availability of viewpoints, then you have right there why people are voting for them.