You do not have to agree with a person's opinions to see the value in defending their right to express them. I would pre-empt a discussion on whether or not Patreon has exhibited political bias in its bans. Instead, consider that Sam Harris also believes this. Is Sam Harris somehow also an alt-right taboo character? Surely not.
It seems you're referring to Lauren Southern (as that was apparently who Harris defended), who Patreon removed for using the funds she was raising there to block NGO ships.
Is your position that (contrary to Patreon's judgement) this was not an act that put lives at risk, or that she is entitled to use their platform to put lives at risk as a matter of her free speech?
Patron is not obligated to serve anyone (besides protected classes).
You are perhaps trying to imply that patron is such a large monopoly that there is no viable alternative to which I would respond that patrons monopoly should be addressed directly (treat the cause not the symptom.)
To be clear - are you talking about this section or also including the following one (the crackdown on sex workers)? As far as I know, Sam Harris has defended the right of Lauren Southern to express herself on Patreon by raising funds to attack ships in the Mediterranean, but has not defended the rights of sex workers to express themselves on Patreon by posting "NSFW" (a misnomer, because Patreon is not usually a workplace tool) content.
So I'm not sure if Sam Harris is an alt-right taboo character, but I would claim that he is politically biased in what sort of speech rights he defends.
I sense you're making a false equivalence between explicit photographic material and political opinions. I think it is all right to remove sexual content, if that is your desire as a platform. It's a very different can of worms from political censorship.
As for Sam Harris, I have not heard him speak one way or the other on the topic. I think your argument sounds like attacking somebody critical to China because they were not critical over your favorite issue.
Which the sex workers would refer to as their job. If we really want to talk about equivalency, one side wants to air their opinion about some matter, and on the other side are a bunch of people who just want to be able to work and get paid today.
People constantly view pornography solely from a consumption perspective. Yes, not being able to get porn on Patreon is a trivial problem for consumers. Not being able to produce porn is a serious problem for the creators.
Frankly, politics is probably a lot more poisonous to Patreon than porn is. Porn is usually quiet, they don't jam it in people's faces. Politics is all about saying controversial things for air time, which is going to cause them never ending headaches.
