Who is doing the censoring here? It's YouTube. They have a right to remove content from their platform as they see fit, in accordance with their TOS. There is no right to post YouTube videos in the constitution.

Your not being oppressed. Get over it.

I refer you back to my original comment. I quoted the Canadian Supreme Court in part to separate the legal question from the deeper one. As a non-American, the legal question is honestly pretty boring. The deeper issue of what constitutes a healthy society with free debate and expression, however, is interesting to me.

Because free speech is a societal and cultural value, as much as a legal one. A commune of religious weirdos with no laws at all could be highly tolerant or intolerant of dissent. It could embrace or reject free speech, just socially based on whether they ostracize the dissenters. Similarly, a nation of publishers where every publisher refuses to publish anything controversial, dissident or offensive may have no First Amendment issues, but it's not one that takes the principles and values of free speech very seriously.

There is no question here other than the legal one. End of story. These people have their free speech. If that artist wanted to, they could host their own website and serve that video all day long.

It seems like you are confusing real life with some fantasy world you live in. Welcome to late stage capitalism. It's not fair.

As I said, rationalizations. What is also amazing is that people think that repeating the obvious in vaguely sassy fashion is somehow an argument. In any case, Youtube's "rights" as you call them would be more palatable if they did not enjoy section 230 immunity. Furthermore, I'm sure there is a legal case to be made regarding the Government employing private actors in a manner that violates the first amendment.

So you want to limit free speech then? Who gets to have free speech in your opinion?

It is sad I have to repeat myself so you can understand that private companies can do as they please.

I have said no such thing, quite the opposite. If you have truly missed that then, an further discussion with you is doomed.

Nah you got me, that was a trap