Some have also pointed out the possibility that some governments or corporations only oppose lolicon in order to deflect from their own complicity in IRL pedophilia and human trafficking, that one aspect of anarcho-tyranny.
Or that the tactics used to discourage the publication of Lolicon are similar that are used to prevent any form of politically incorrect speech.
Still a bad argument, because it is based on downplaying Japan's problems with CSA. And dodging the fact that lolicon should absolutely be fucking illegal.
Or that we've already got an anarcho-tyranny now, both in cyberspace and IRL, with people exchanging both loli and actual photographic child porn on the clearweb.
Libertarianism and its consequences have been a disaster for the human race.
I still fully believe in what
@Ewan McGregor said
Child porn exists because it is allowed to exist.
The goverment fully has the means to crack down on all of this and send in law enforcement to deal with this content. You see that whenever a man gets charged for having threatened a member of the goverment on the internet, like that one guy who got arrested for making death threats in 4chan (a site which lolicons use in large numbers).
If the tactics used to ban lolicon are the same ones used to stiffle free speech, then why is lolicon still so easy to find? This very site was out of the clearnet for months on end due to it allowing for anti-troon opinions to be posted freely, meanwhile you can see lolicon content on Twitter, 4chan, Reddit, and even Youtube if you look hard enough. It's just like what the comment which the fat hungolian Male Idiot made exemplifies, they are willing to overlook
every single attack on free speech except the ones that have to do with pornography. The internet won't "become less free if we don't defend lolicon", the internet is the less free it has ever been and lolicon is on its peak of popularity, maybe both things are completely unrelated. Or maybe it has darker reasons for it to remain, come to think of it:
Who benefits from conflating free speech with pornographic content, like lolicon/shotacon? Who benefits from people like Nick Rekieta being seen (in the past) as one of the heavyweights of e-libertarianism? Who benefits from liberty to be equated with engaging in hedonistic behavior? It's not the guy on the street who wants to freely proffess his faith in spite of following a minority religion, it's not the protestors marching across town to hold their goverment accountable, it's not the guy who follows whatever fringe ideology and wants his voice being able to be heard by whoever wants to hear it. It's the sexually degenerate the one who benefits from it, that causes every "free speech" site to turn into the digital equivalent of a dark back alley where illegal media is distributed, and now the ones who do want to restrict free speech have the moral high ground, as all what a person can think of whenever they hear the words "free speech advocate" is an old, fat man who spends his days inside his gooncave and wants to diddle kids (only digital ones, of course!). All the while the positions who actually matter have been dropped out of the free speech discourse for being "hateful, homphobic, racist, islamophobic, mysoginistic, etc, etc". There couldn't have been a better outcome for the powers that be than this one, and this current state, in which the internet finds itself, is what I mean whenever I call them "straight out of 2016".
They lost, free speech, on the internet, lost. It's gone, dead, buried, and 6 feet under, Elon's purchase of Twitter brought "free speech" for 5 minutes and then all returned to the statu quo afterwards. Fighting for lolicon in defense of free speech when you lost in every other front is the most pointless fight in history, and if you fight for lolicon in defense of lolicon, then you belong inside a woodchipper, nothing more
