ok, so let me make clear that I don't necessarily believe in the
VAST majority of things that alex jones says or conspiracies in general, I like them the same way someone would enjoy a sci-fi story. to me he is just an entertainment product and a meme, and I'd say that since the beginning of the last decade he started marketing himself that way and knows that he is full of shit most of the time. there are tons of people who swallow his every word, but most people already know what to expect.
but his right to say it is extremely important, I would be an absolute hypocrite if I at least didn't acknowledge that right while pretending to be pro-choice.
Doubting a large and more powerful group simply because it is large and powerful IS definitely justified and critical, specially when we're talking about authority figures. corruption and exploitation run rampant virtually in every single one of them and if you don't believe me, then just take a look outside, or look at the US military history, or at any organized religion, etc. doubting them has lead to exposing horrendous crimes and saved millions of lives or simply to make the public be aware of their exploitation in the process. and even if there's nothing shady going on, it's better to doubt than to bend over and let them get away with such stuff.
I agree, but this is a complicated issue and there's an extremely important difference between alex jone's freedom of speech and a big group spreading disinformation. alex jones just wants to sell his shitty vitamins that turn you red over time (
literally) and the large groups wants power and control over people, or cover their crimes.
the argument was that they used censorship. and as far as i know, alex jones has never started a campaign to intimidate and threaten people into believing what he's saying.
and their science was bullshit, but so was a lot of the science at the time period. most of it has evolved and is continuously changing still. so who's to say that what we know and think is not total bullshit? I really don't want to get into it, but right now there are politically motivated concepts getting into academia and even child books, and a lot of critics who have different arguments are being silenced in softer, yet similar ways.
It absolutely is about what you think other people should believe in, why else would you argue that he should not have a platform and be hidden from the world?
what you believe is real is not objective to others, and I'm sure that we share a lot in our world view since you seem to be the kind of person who tries to get facts scientifically from verified information, but that's not what other people want or should believe in. let them get to their own conclusions, give them the option to hear the crazy people and decide for themselves. you said it yourself, let them reach their own conclusions.
that's why freedom of speech is so beautiful and why I envy you guys so much up there in the US. the moment that we start silencing the other side is the moment that we take the slippery slope into disgraceful authoritarian governments who can and absolutely will play with information and disinformation towards their goals.
EDIT: and just as I finished writing this, reddit just banned 2000 subreddis because they don't politically align with what they want. proving my point that large organizations want to manipulate the discourse and then manipulate science and information themselves.