In fairness, Elon isn't alone in this. There's a whole swath of people who don't believe problems exist until they themselves experience them, and if they can't use money - because many of these people often have more than they need of it - to make the problem go away so they can continue their denial immediately, it becomes the most outrageous problem in the world.

"What's that? It affected other people? Well, my money and influence now might do something about it for them, maybe, while it's helping me to get rid of it. See how charitable I am? Veritable philanthropist even."

It could be worse though. Their problem might align with something that isn't in your favour and now they're using their money and influence to elevate fascists and eugenicists and oh, that's what's happening here, isn't it

I think it is a mistake to think that free speech absolutists are evil people. Their position is that bad ideas are better fought and ridiculed in public space, and forbidding them is counterproductive because it breeds conspiracy theories and removes ability to show in discussion why the idea is bad.

I do not want to discuss if it is right idea or wrong - it is irrelevant to my main point. This idea is supported because a person think it the best idea for everyone, that is not because the person is malicious.