It is, but without the “rigorous intellectual approach” referred to by @brookmanknight, that becomes a weak excuse. That sort intellectual laziness is what has made the libertarian right in America effectively indistinguishable from the so-called alt-right over there and they are fascists.
Embracing and encouraging liberty for all is essential, but without understanding the reasons and basis for it it’s too easy for things to manifest as the opposite of their meaning.
Take freedom of expression, for instance, it’s arguably one of the most core, fundamental rights needed to ensure the rigorous debate, it’s one of the principal concerns of this party and it is one which we have seen attacked by authoritarian bastards on every continent for decades. Yet it is the “defence of free speech” which is most often cited by those same opponents of genuine free speech for doing what they do.
The big example online beginning a few years ago being GamerGate. It was the pro-GG crowd who always claimed their actions were about free speech along with their catch phrase, “ethics in gaming journalism.” Yet they were the ones prosecuting targeted campaigns against any single individual of harassment, threats of violence against either that target or those close to them, in some cases credible threats which moved beyond the keyboard.
While most of that sort of thing seems to happen in North America, it’s not limited to that. Though it is still only the USA where people have managed to kill people that way (i.e. via SWATting).
We even tried to address some of this at last year’s Pax Pirata and there was a lot going on there that was off stage. Most people have no idea how much (it’s also why I wasn’t quite as relaxed as during the previous one and it will no doubt show in the footage). In fact, as far as I am aware, that was the only panel at PAX Aus last year to have someone physically removed from the event during the conduct of the panel.
Yeah, we’re for free speech, but we’re for it for everyone and not just those we agree with. Whereas in the example of the pro-GG crowd, they were only for free speech for themselves and prosecuted campaigns of persecution, vilification and violence against those who disagreed with them. That’s not free speech, that’s armchair fascism; they’d probably prefer to go further, but they don’t have an army willing to get off the couch long enough to do anything.
Yes, I know it’s not just the the various troll brigades guilty of this sort of thing too. The various branches of so-called progressives amongst the left and centre-left are notorious for taking a very similar attitude regarding the extent and, of course, limitations of any civil liberty or even of human rights. Though they often use slightly different tactics.
There are even areas where they’re much worse than GG were since in some areas they’ve actually managed to achieve (or be suckered into achieving, it’s a bit difficult to tell) making it politically correct (or mandatory from their POV) to suppress certain types of scientific or medical information. This speech or information suppression (it’s not quite censorship; the information is still available, but it can’t be discussed in their forums or in public without a progressive pile on or “no-platforming” action) in such a way the adverse affect on one particular minority could be life threatening. The irony is that almost all of these people are also vocal when it comes to fighting back against fascists without realising they’re doing the same regarding another matter.
You’ll note that even here I’m avoiding stating what that other matter is. That’s because it’s not just the progressives who hate that topic and I don’t feel like dealing with it now. It’s enough to know that it exists and besides, if and/or when I do deal with it, it’ll be a bit more than a blog or forum post.
For now it’s enough to know that there are such areas that either or both (or all, or most) sides of politics want to suppress arbitrarily; either for power or because they genuinely believe in the justness of their cause. Yet in the two examples here, one has created campaigns of persecution against any vocal opposition, mostly women, in order to suppress their speech; while the other has integrated one particular sociological view to such an extreme and without context that they are literally preventing a certain type of minority from either discussing or finding the information they need to survive.
Which is worse? I don’t know, but I do know that both are killing people and I know that I don’t want to be associated with either of them and I certainly don’t want to think like them.
The alt-right (including pro-GG, 4chan, 8chan, kiwi farms and the other troll brigades) are fascists and the progressive left are often crypto-fascists. Not falling into the same traps they have requires effort and conscious thought.