How far can your right to free speech be protected as a free person?

This question should rightly underline the debate over the suspension of Trump's handle, but it isn't. Folks are tweeting false equivalences: China v USA; Trump v Social Media Bill Nigeria

There's no free person. At least, this is the truth I learn from the writings of JS Mills, Isaiah Berlin and even from philosophers as Quentin Skinner and Philip Petitt

At least, Berlin ( See his Two Concepts of Liberty) establishes the basis for which freedom can be interrogated, either as positive or negative freedom. Or Freedom as non-domination as Skinner and Petitt argue

So, the idea that freedom can be protected when it is exercised as negative freedom is absurd to me. Trump's freedom of speech, if not curtailed, interferes with his followers rights and produces dangerous effects by interference. I explain thus:

Trump's supporters decision to exercise the freedom of movement into a restricted area directly correlates to Trump's interference by incitement and goading

To take away the medium for expressing the power of interference ( or exercise of right by domination) from Trump is not a denial of his right to free speech.

For my thoughts on freedoms & liberties generally, see the recent publication of the Centre for Liberty, Abuja.

Good afternoon from the sanctum sanctorum of the shrine