Article Why a British First Amendment would not work? (Orwellian style)

[C C]

https://conservativehome.com/2026/05/04/...-not-work/

EXCERPTS: This controversy could not have been better timed to draw attention to a recently drafted bill which would enshrine free speech in UK law, similar to the First Amendment in the United States. ... While it is not clear whether the proposed bill is likely to be introduced to Parliament soon, there is no denying the seriousness of the issue it is designed to address.

Last year it was revealed that police in England and Wales were making more than 30 arrests per day for social media posts and other messages which were deemed to have caused “annoyance,” “inconvenience” or “anxiety”.

[...] But would a Freedom of Speech Bill actually be able to prevent such overreach? ... Violations of the First Amendment in the US would have been no mystery to La Boétie: officials were able to effectively break the law because they knew the public

[...] Unfortunately, the British public simply does not value free speech. A YouGov poll found last year that only 28 per cent of people believe that one should be able to speak one’s mind on social media, while 61 per cent felt it was more important that online abuse and threats should be prevented... (MORE - missing details)

[confused2]

I suspect what UK people want is really 'politeness' rather than censorship of the actual opinion expressed.
The invisible force field that defends us from our neighbours is our culture .. remove that and we'd need guns - the US already have guns so they don't place the same value on the cultural defence.
The middle classes associate rudeness with madness, stupidity and 'danger'.
The working classes .. not really a polite way to put this ..
The middle classes don't really want to mingle with the working classes ,, get the rudeness off the Internet and you remove the mad, stupid and dangerous element at the same time.
A political party courting the working classes will be in favour of free speech .. others not so much.

[Syne]

Étienne de La Boétie’s Discourse on Voluntary Servitude (c. 1552–1553) argues that tyranny is maintained not by force, but by the voluntary consent and habituated obedience of the populace.
- Gemini

I'm betting Brits were already trending sheepish before losing their guns.

The UK effectively banned private ownership of most handguns in 1997 following the Dunblane school massacre (1996). The Firearms (Amendment) Acts 1997 tightened restrictions, banning all cartridge handguns, except for specialized antique or muzzle-loading firearms. Similar bans on semi-automatic rifles were enacted earlier, notably after the 1987 Hungerford massacre.
- Gemini

As most sane people realize, silence is not the same as removal or safety.

[stryder]

When younger my original interpretation of the concept of free speech was that it is valued only when it's used in the right context.

If a government wants people to identify problems or put forwards solutions like a think tank, then free speech is a necessity.

Consider person within the military being put at easy and then being told "You are free to speak". In that instance its about a person of a lesser rank having the capacity to talk to someone of a higher rank without the formal rebuffing. Ideally giving them the opportunity to have an opinion rather than just being a mindless lacky.

It's therefore not really meant for them to be rude at the rank and call them out on things. (Thats more due to socialism where people do not see rank or hierarchical and consider everyone their peers.)

Social media tends to aim at every one being a persons peers, however it blatently fails as classism still exists (expecially amongst sociopaths).

[Syne]

Considering classism is more ingrained in the UK, that would have some bearing on the sheepishness.

But if "rude" is a standard, who gets to define it? More likely the social elites than the hoi polloi. In which case it is a system of control, where restricting what people are allowed to say eventually self-censors what they allow themselves to think, lest they let it slip out.

[confused2]

In which case it [politeness] is a system of control,

Of course it is. Who, in their right mind, would want a country run by deplorables?

[Syne]

In which case it [politeness] is a system of control,

Of course it is. Who, in their right mind, would want a country run by deplorables?

Yeah, who would want a country run by a free people. 9_9
Just call them names and you can keep your precious classism.