Equal freedom for all is noble in principle, but fails disastrously in practice.
When rapists and murderers are granted the same rights to walk the streets as civil and caring people are, the result is Venezuela or Haiti 2025.
When those few who despise other people are separated from civil and caring people, the result is countries like Canada, where 85-year-olds like me can walk the streets in safety, and help others to the extent of being awarded the Sovereign's Medal for Volunteers during the reign of Queen Elizabeth II, as I was.
Wikipedia is founded on an equally noble concept: equal freedom for all to write and edit information on it. It too has failed in practice.
When destructive and uncaring people are granted equal rights on a forum with productive caring people who search to understand, there are two results. First is the survival of only the most unpleasant on the forum, those who quickly drive knowledgeable and capable people away from the site. Second, the information on the forum has zero trustworthiness.
Two mechanisms in Wikipedia are key to the power given to such people. Any person may place a 'watch' on any page: they are notified the moment any other person makes an edit to that page. Then, the watcher invokes the 'revert' mechanism. No matter how long the latest editor took to research and write the edit, it is undone in a second by a reverter.
The result: page after page on Wikipedia with hundreds of edits, half of which (reverts) were done by one person.
A result I recently noted as a retired pilot: page after page on aircraft accidents most of which cover up when the PIC was responsible.
It's why I left Wikipedia two decades ago, and why personally I don't trust a single word on the site.