Charles: "I think you mean you think Marx would have thought so. How about some support for your claim ?"
What about those passages in the Poverty of Philosophy where he heaps scorn on Proudhon for erecting bourgeois property rights into a basis for socialism (so too in the letter to Annenkov on the same subject). So too in Capital where he talks of the realm of rights as a mere reflex of exchange on the market, where the realm of production is one of subjugation.
Marx envisages that, given sufficient development of the productive forces (should our green friends ever permit it) 'only then can the narrow horizon of bourgeois right be crossed in its entirety and society inscribe on its banners: From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs!' (critique of the Gotha Programme, .3, p18 in my ed.)
Marx's support for freedom of speech, along with a great many other bourgeois freedoms, including free trade, is historically restricted to the bourgeois epoch, and its immediate precursor. (Pashukanis made a good case that the same safeguards should be extended to defendants rights under the early stages of socialism, when want was still a factor, but Stalin had him killed for it.) No Marxist I know considers that freedom of speech would be an issue under communism - not because it would be restricted, but because it wouldn't. -- James Heartfield The 'Death of the Subject' Explained is available at GBP11.00, plus GBP1.00 p&p from Publications, audacity.org, 8 College Close, Hackney, London, E9 6ER. Make cheques payable to 'Audacity Ltd'