Once you present that elusive positive list of non-speech-suppressing instances of rightwing power, we may move the discussion on from there.

What is the point when you don't even deny that they exist. It would be a waste of my time.

In the current discourse, people regularly mistake the "moderate" (i.e., fake) left for the far left.

What does that even mean? What moderate ideas and claims are called far left?

Here is a list of far left lunacy that is mainstream: giving hormone blockers to preteens. Gender fluidity. The idea that gender traits determine your sex. Critical race theory. Communism.

How many supporters of the recent #forcethevote initiative widely deemed "radical" are in favor of (let alone calling for) the censorship attributed to "the left" here? How many of those are Bernie-or-bust?

You seem to think that calling individual people radicals and the mainstream ideas of the left being radical are somehow the same thing. They are not. I don't give a fuck about name calling, that is a leftist thing. It is not the people being crazy that matters, it is the ideas being crazy that matters. Force the vote has nothing to do with anything, and that those people were called radicals by other leftists certainly means nothing.

Isn't it funny you'd choose a staunchly rightwing instance of speech suppression to illustrate just how bad "leftwing" speech suppression is? I find it funny... :)

It's literally the point. It's frankly concerning that you think it was unintentional.