Oh great, another 2 paragraph shallow review on a subject matter cyberdemon has very little grasp on.
Mostly what I'm seeing here is projection, I don't think infowars ever said that they were joking, but it was kind of you to put that projection in there for them. At most you could say entertainment, which is one good way to captivate someone (very LOL when making this statement on your blog). You can restrict speech as much as you want, but someone will always find ways to circumvent that, even if they have to talk in code or even something as simple as subtle eye movements. Forcing the issue underground only breeds further resentment and increases extreme reaction (making death threats more likely to become an actual reality rather than a meme or just general harassment)
However the real issue here is the monopolistic nature of these companies and the increasing control they have over communiqué. Sure you may view this act as some kind of victory (as hollow as it is), but these corporations are NOT your friends. They do NOT have your interests in mind. They do NOT have ideals except making money. They will turn sides on a dime when it is convenient for them to do so, why? Because they already have the power to do so, you couldn't stop them if you tried. If twitter wanted to print "burn all faggots" on every page then they could do so easily, but it's not in their interest to do so, the same for the inverse (just think of one that isn't mild). The interesting thing about these platforms is that they all originally had much more freedom; youtube for instance, it bought a lot of laughs when two youtubers would go back and forth between each other, making the next video to fuel whatever petty war they had, in general nobody gave a fuck. But youtube around 2010 tried to put a stop to that, you couldn't name names anymore or else your channel would get owned; of course people just stepped around that by being more non-specific or passive aggressive. Twitter specifically was very pro-freespeech and pro-privacy when it was newly a thing, I believe I remember a newspaper article comparing various platforms around 10 years ago and twitter was rated as one of the highest for both those things; now twitter is one of the very few websites that doesn't allow you to use a VPN (god forbid you're a whistle blower and want to get important information out to an audience without the risk of getting killed), combine that with people who just bot followers to get fake popularity and it just looks pedantic. Facebook I'll admit to never using, but I imagine in the early days when it was just for college students it was mostly unmoderated.(feel free to corrrect on that one). Apple and spotify? I'm not really sure why alex jones is on a music store (guessing he has some dumb songs about muh frogs turning gay), but collusion between large corporations is very illegal, they could have been more subtle about it too, at least space it out a bit or something, but does anyone have the money to sue them? Not really, they're not accountable for anything they do. Again, none of them have your interests at heart... this isn't a positive thing in the slightest. It's easy to back something when it destroys your enemies, but what if it gets turned back on you? Funny enough, either in the comments or where ever I'm seeing a lot of left wing people or lgbt saying they get targeted by twitter takedowns far more than right wing people. This one's a hard one to gauge since I believe there's currently bots that auto suspend twitter accounts these days? Either way I'm sure both sides report each other, maybe one side is more savvy with abusing the system? But that's for small timers, with big ones it's much harder to get rid of them because reports are subject to more scrutiny and being in the majority of the public eye means it can be bad for PR if someone big suddenly disappears off their site (again, twitter does NOT care about you or anyone but themselves!)
Now before you put words in my mouth, I never said freespeech was for everywhere and every place. Obviously you don't go shouting in your mother's face "you're a fucking faggot!" 20 times a day(or maybe you do? hehe), if you did that she would slap you in the face, that would be the consequence (no need for interferance from the state) and the end of the matter. However, all of these mentioned services are platforms, you know, platforms for self expression? What's the point in the website if it's just used to reinforce one viewpoint? I can just do the same thing by asking my friends to agree with me without any need to waste internet bandwidth.
Another funny thing I saw about you, is referring to many users of this steemit service as "cringe libertarians". Almost as if you intend to remove that sort of person and subvert steemit in general. Here's an idea, why don't you make your own platform you're fully in control of and see how it takes off? tech equivalent of "beat my time" ( you won't tho =D )