The social media sites have a right to shut down voices, but I'm strongly against it because the hardcore Left clearly doesn't take freedom of expression seriously or honestly.
There is no one on this board who is more pro-freedom of expression than I.
Whether it's a commie or a Nazi, I think that all voices must be heard, unencumbered.
Proclaiming himself a liberal in favor of free speech, Teitelbaum then turns around, denigrates part of the left as "regressive", and argues they have no place in the debate hall. Not aware of that glaringly obvious self-contradiction, he whines about Yiannopoulos, the strident hate-preacher, being called a "Nazi", and finds that too insulting to be heard or allowed. Because, real freedom of speech is freedom of speech with which we disagree, except if Teitelbaum's ancestors would find it insulting.
Of course, Congress shall make no law prohibiting Yiannopoulos from spouting whatever crap he is willing to spout. That's something entirely different from providing that hate-preacher a platform to disseminate his crap, and to normalize the hatred upon which he thrives.
Standing up to hate-preachers is a matter of common decency, and doing so in a non-violent way is itself a matter of freedom of speech. Teitelbaum never even begins to realize that these issues need to be balanced, and that freedom of speech is a matter more complex than asserting his supremacy and calling those with whom he disagrees names (while whining about name-calling). But then, when incapable of mastering the complexity of the issue at hand, asserting your supremacy and calling your opponents names ("regressive") is what is left. Isn't that so, Mac? And isn't that the entirety of your sleazy shtick?