One interpretation I've been entertaining: In the modern world, we have recently realized that speech is more complicated than people exchanging ideas in a civil manner, and that speech has the power to influence consensus reality through second order and higher effects. (Think: phenomena such as "self-radicalization"). This leads to decisions to simply restrict speech rather than deal with the complexity.
I am not entirely convinced that restricting speech is the right move. I think if anything it creates division. Either way, we'll most likely see how it works out in the next few years.
I am not entirely convinced that restricting speech is the right move. I think if anything it creates division. Either way, we'll most likely see how it works out in the next few years.