You can say Substack should host Nazis, but don't pretend there's some "free speech" principle to it. Substack has a strict ban on pornography. Welcoming Nazis while banning sex workers isn't a principled stand, it's a choice, an expression that you like the former and dislike the latter.

Most of the time it's about the payment networks going crazy with pornography...

It's true. I mean even fascist Xitter doesn't have that inconsistency.

It’s not a principled free speech stand, anyway

"They're not Nazis they just have different views," the admins exclaimed before they were beaten with a tire iron.

One thing not yet touched on is how this insidious behaviour happens across all kinds of (mostly small) businesses which are being prevented from accessing services because banks and hosting providers have policies against modern endeavours which they class as "risky"... like selling digital goods.

I don't think Substack should host Nazis either, but drawing content-based distinctions (no nude/prurient content) but not viewpoint-based distinctions (allowing Nazis) has a long First Amendment pedigree. No idea if that's their reasoning but it's not necessarily about liking Nazis.

A point I've been making for a while is that actual "free speech absolutists" are very rare, and most people who claim to be such are actually Nazi sympathizers who can't say why they really want to permit Nazi speech. You can usually catch them advocating censorship for other things.

Fuck it! Invite Nazi whores! Best of both worlds

"Sex workers" 🤔

my entirely subjective stance of "never trust a dude with a substack in his bio" has been proven right