A system which produces effects extrinsically equivalent to direct proscriptions on free speech is not better than a system which explicitly proscribes some speech, and is arguably worse, because it tricks credulous people into thinking it's not as bad.
The state doesn’t need to directly destroy you financially like they do in China.
They just have a legal framework that allows lawyers to do it for them.
And we think we have so much more freedom in the west.
I have a very strong suspicion that if I started exercising my 'freedoms' in a harassing manner against you personally then suddenly your views would be very different.