As much as facebook is a thing I love to hate, I don't see the problem there. It's not because you have an onion site that you are forced to allow any content whatsoever, and in fact many onion services explicitly forbid certain types of content for good reasons.

You're free to not connect to their platform either way (and to be subject to their limitations regarding contents and behaviour), whereas setting up an onion service can be about stuff that people aren't free to avoid (i.e. censorship by the only ISP they might have, by a state, etc). There's no issue with consistency there.

Still amazing that they brute force generated that onion address.

why is that hypocrisy? Even if facebook censors, it's plausible that their positios is that they want to let you opt-in to censorship. an onion site lets you use the site that they censor on an opt-in basis. (I opted out of facebook just over a month ago).

The hypocrisy is that the company chooses to fight the 'free speech' fight by evading the censorship of governments when it benefits them and censors those it disagrees with otherwise.