1. Yes, it is mind blowing because Naomi is right. This is not some absolutist position - if we can't discuss things *simply* because some individuals say that they don't like it that isn't compatible with any concept of free discussion at all/ https://twitter.com/cymrurouge/status/1334627572982935561

2. As a (purportedly) socialist party, it's right to prohibit bigoted speech acts/discussion that represent a fundamental violation of the equal dignity of members. But this has to be based on some test of inter-subjective reasonableness, not giving veto power to certain players

3. If we do that we run into all sorts of contradictions anyway as the legitimate feelings of some are pitted against the equally legitimate feelings of others.

4. Relatedly, there's the 'optics left' view JC had a 'right' to make his statement but he 'shouldn't' (ethically) because of how some felt about it. But if the latter is always trumps, then again you're awarding veto power, this time to the limits of *ethical* free discussion.