Very good, these posts are confirming that free speech does have the societal purpose of assuring unity required to alter or abolish government destructive to unalienable right.
Of course it has many other purposes, but its ultimate purpose is for survival, and life is the ultimate unalienable right, so all things are reasonably consistent in the assertion that the ultimate purpose of free speech is to enable the unity needed to alter or abolish.
Now, since the first amendment does not directly state this, but it is indirectly defined through inference and deduction of the Declaration of Independence, the origins of the "unalienable rights".
I have friends that are Indigenous Americans. One specifically, with Seneca ancestry brought me a phrase which a profound societal, philosophical doctrine surrounding the human functions of free speech. It is called "The Greater Meaning Of Free Speech". From it I derived the legalistic purpose of free speech. It goes like this.
From the practice of free speech between people, an understanding can be created. From the understanding can come; forgiveness, tolerance, acceptance, respect, trust, friendship and love, protecting life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
There were very likely loyalist factions that complained bitterly about the inclusion of such philosophy in the 1776 document, despite its obvious logical connections to what became constitutional intent. Clearly, government has a duty to not just allow all speech, but to empower that speech which creates the kind of unity that can alter or abolish it IF it becomes destructive to unalienable rights.
Of course the implications of this are huge. This apparent deficiency of the First Amendment has created political disasters that threaten unalienable rights widely, on various levels.
Accordingly, the act of altering or abolishing, which is codified as Article V, needs to be undertaken. And, it seems that this prime constitutional right enabling the needed unity is a logical place to start.
The Greater Meaning of Free speech will set an example of what kind of speech the government must empower to be shared to foster the type of unity that WILL alter or abolish is government ever shows a destructive tendency towards those vital rights.
Shall we extend the consistency established her into a paradigm of recognition of the abridging of the PURPOSE of free speech.