The problem I ahve with your posts is that you saw a poster saying that censoring Nazis is a good thing, and that reflexively got you upset. You were so upset that you ignored the context of that quote being about free online platforms, and not governments.
Then the argument you make is bad. The “first they came for” quote is a slippery slope fallacy. It is not accurate. Banning or censoring one group does not inevitably lead to banning or censoring the other group. Sites (including this very board) ban Nazi crap without banning all that other crap all the time. And there are even countries like Germany that ban Nazi speech in many contexts, and they’ve not descended into going after all the others. So there remains no argument it is anything but the logical fallacy of the slippery slope.
Any platform with user content tries to have a balance between allowing freedom of speech and policing content. Go too far one way, and you get an echo chamber. But go too far the other way, and you get the Nazis which chase everyone else away. And then, once there are only Nazis there, you wind up with what happened to 8chan: violent rhetoric continues until one person says they’ll do it in real life and is egged on by the rest, with no one to tell them no.
This gets them shut down, because whoever chooses to host them no longer wants to be associated with them. No one wants to be possibly on the hook for the violence that inevitably occurs.
The same thing happens in misogynist forums, too, BTW. Incels also wind up becoming violent, which is why they find it hard to find a platform. Hence why MrDibble included them in his list.
Nazism has no place in civil discussion. Nazism ultimately results in violence against others. It is verifiably evil, and that’s never going to change. There is no reason for anyone to feel a need to give Nazism a platform. There’s no need for any sort of debate about whether Nazism is correct.
So it makes no sense for your reflexive response to “censoring Nazis” to be about the censoring. It makes no sense for you to bring up other non-violent ideologies which, even when left in echo chambers, don’t wind up killing people.
Sure, you can argue they have the First Amendment right to their ideas, but that does not mean any of us have to make it any easier for those ideas to spread. Remember, platforms are run by people.