Free speech, even outright lies, racism, etc. must necessarily exist in the public forum if a society is to remain free.
For now, the silencing is "friendly" in that it only destroys livelihoods. If we allow it to become a norm then how long will it take a populous - now so used to being silenced - to agree to let the government silence the "other"?
Once there is a "party" line, as in China, only suffering follows.
"For a while," said pretty much every such outfit.
“Contrary to what most people think, Weimar Germany did have hate-speech laws, and they were applied quite frequently. The assertion that Nazi propaganda played a significant role in mobilising anti-Jewish sentiment is, of course, irrefutable. But to claim that the Holocaust could have been prevented if only anti-Semitic speech and Nazi propaganda had been banned has little basis in reality. Leading Nazis such as Joseph Goebbels, Theodor Fritsch and Julius Streicher were all prosecuted for anti-Semitic speech.
“Pre-Hitler Germany had laws very much like the anti-hate laws of today, and they were enforced with some vigour.” [1]
"In the decade from 1923 to 1933, the Nazi propaganda magazine Der Stürmer — of which Streicher was the executive publisher — was confiscated or had its editors taken to court no fewer than 36 times. The more charges Streicher faced, the more the admiration of his supporters grew. In fact, the courts became an important platform for Streicher’s campaign against the Jews." [2]
[1] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/03064220177488...
[2] https://www.cato.org/policy-report/mayjune-2015/war-free-exp...
Truth is the better strategic bet, every time.
In my experience, truth is strong, and those who want to restrict speech probably aren't arguing for truth, but for their version of some ideology.