You seem to be a free speech fundamentalist and refuse to recognize any competing interests. In your last post, you keep conflating the suppression of opinion with the suppression of posts that actually advocate violence. You say this, for instance:

I do not think that you can argue that people should not have a voice on the basis that you do not like what they are saying.

Of course, I wouldn’t argue anything like that and don’t believe that. But there’s a difference between merely not liking someone’s opinion and someone advocating outright violence against others. Nothing that I’ve personally written, nothing in the youtube.com video you linked to, and nothing in the vast majority of these identity politics rants on Medium and elsewhere that I disagree with actually advocates violence against cops (or against anyone else), and so I’m not calling for any of these opinions to be suppressed. Advocacy of violence is where I’d draw the line, however, and it’s where Medium’s rules also have drawn the line. (Again, if this were a question of government suppressing free speech, I’d draw the line differently and allow people to say whatever they want so long as they aren’t screaming “fire” in a crowded movie theater, etc.)

You also write, “The police are violent, and often not for good cause in many people’s eyes.” People are entitled to their opinions, though, as I’ve shown, there’s no actual epidemic of police violence against blacks going on. Having said that, unjustified police violence, regardless of race or racism, is never a good thing, and I’m all for doing what we can to oppose such violence. (I think making it into a race issue has actually hurt that fight by making this into a contentious and polarized battle of blacks+white liberals vs. cops+white conservatives rather than a battle of concerned-citizens-of-all-races-and-creeds vs. unjustified-police-violence-against-anyone.) But, in any event, advocating violence against cops is not a productive solution for anybody involved, and I think Medium is well within its rights in having a policy in opposition to advocacy of outright violence (whether Medium enforces that policy is a different matter, and I guess we’ll see…). As I said, anyone is free to advocate for violence; but private companies such as Medium shouldn’t have any obligation to allow such people to use their tools or technology to advance that goal.