If by 'murder' you mean 'unjustified killing', then that's trivially true. If, on the other hand, you just mean 'killing', then it's far from obvious that killing is 'unambiguously evil' (self-defense comes to mind).
> I feel like society, at least a larger portion of it, understood this in the past. Your creating taboos. Things we don't dare talk about or explore because we fear having our lives destroyed by twitter lynch mobs and the like.
Harassment on social media is certainly an issue, but it's ridiculous to describe 'people criticizing me on the Internet for what I say' to 'censorship'.
> But what you actually want to do is knowing as "mobbing" in Europe and it's generally illegal (at least in some countries)
No, what I 'actually want to do' is allow people to chose which companies to purchase from, and to allow them to advocate for others doing the same. What exactly do you mean by 'mobbing'?
> If your paper was critical of the Fuhrer brown shirts would storm in, trash the place and assualt people
Are you really going to compare online speech to physical violence?
> Live and let live. There are people out there with different views than you. Some of those views might be down right offensive if you really thought about it.
How do you determine which of those are 'unambiguously evil'?