Well if we can agree that the freedom of speech issue in Britain is being whipped up by the populists and the Tory’s who are aping the populists, along with themedia organs aiding them in this. — Punshhh

I think it is mostly down to social media that makes what was already there present in your face. I do not honestly think anything has gotten much worse overall in day-to-day life. I could be completely wrong though. I am not really in the best position to say and nor can I judge your view as I do nto know you at all.

However we do seem to now have freedoms of speech extended to be racist in public and on media platforms, mysogonist, to lie in the media, unquestioned and to spread conspiracy theories as fact.
It now seems to be much worse to accuse someone of being racist (you’re not allowed to) than it is to actually be racist (which is fine). — Punshhh

Much worse compared to when exactly? What is the metric? I am not being snarky at all here, just want to know on what kind of information you are basing this on.

I know there is a going to be a substantial declin ein living standards in the UK (and already has been) over the coming decades and that this will undoubtedly play into the hands of populists, so I am likely to take your perspective seriously. I have friends and family there who say things have generally gotten worse in many areas of life; financially, socially and politically.

I do not honestly think anything has gotten much worse overall in day-to-day life.

What I’m referring to here is a the rise of Reform, to the point where they are regularly polling above 20% in the polls, in the lead above the other party’s throughout 2025. Nigel Farage is spreading populist fuelled anti immigration hate. This can be seen clearly in the media, when his party won control of a council in the north last year, he gave a speech which was almost word for word like a Trump speech. In which he said things like all DEI (diversity, equality and inclusion) officers and case workers will be sacked immediately (there weren’t any). Budgets would be slashed across all departments etc etc. He often cites antifa an anti fascist left wing group as taking over the country (it doesn’t exist).
This is another incarnation of the British National party (BNP) or the National Front. Which has become mainstream through the spread of miss-information on social media, gaslighting millions with their lies.

Much worse compared to when exactly? What is the metric? I am not being snarky at all here, just want to know on what kind of information you are basing this on.

I don’t know if it’s worse than in the Enoch Powell rivers of blood speech era. As I was young and wasn’t exposed to it at the time.The hatred is palpable at the moment, recently thousands of St George’s flags were secretly erected on lampposts in most towns and villages around the country overnight. Roundabouts painted red white and blue. And aggressive rows and abuse reported when people would take down the flags, or put up other ones in protest.

This alongside a narrative of accusing people of what they themselves (the populists) are doing. Such as shouting that their freedom of speech is being restricted, while demanding the people who push back against their hatred and racism be silenced, or branded as unpatriotic. While wearing a St George’s flag and shouting that it is them who are patriotic, while in the next breath shouting Tommy Robinson (this is a caricature, but is reflective of what is going on).
The Daily Mail and the Telegraph are pushing all this hatred and lies. The BBC news is dumbed down and doesn’t give any pushback and the people believing the lies are taking their news from social media anyway.

So it’s the same pattern as in the past, of the periodic swing from political correctness, to the push back from the BNP and predjudice, which would then swing back again and so on. But this time the swing is bigger and there’s a chance that the racists will get into power.

I have friends and family there who say things have generally gotten worse in many areas of life; financially, socially and politically.

Yes, the cost of living crisis is starting to hit a lot of people now.

The premise being pushed here in this thread is a misunderstanding of the situation — Punshhh

Is that the "premise being pushed"? Aren't both sides being argued for in this thread?

Aren't both sides being argued for in this thread?

Yes, I suppose so, but isn’t one side just saying nothing has changed and the other side insisting things have changed.

Hi Flannel. Mine was a subpar response to your OP. I couldn't find my own example via Google either, for one thing, but mostly, having been cancelled over a free speech issue, I just let myself get irritable. Sorry.

Today, I have Christmas cheer. Two links to evidence, more available if you'd like.

Greg Lukianoff is American, but to my mind is the best critic of free speech restrictions in the English-speaking world.

https://eternallyradicalidea.com/p/yes-the-uk-really-is-that-bad-for

An example of a specific case: parents arrested for disagreements about their school:

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/11/17/the-borehamwood-whatsapp-farce-shames-the-speech-police/

To re-articulate a point, there is evidence of threats to free speech everywhere, including this thread. People do not know the extent of the problem, which is a problem. This is not a partisan issue, and both sides are terrible, although, generally, the right took the playbook from the left, who started this crap game earlier.

One of the arguments Chomsky and others make is that we ought to defend free speech so that our opponents can’t claim it, and use that persecution as publicity. Rather, you should win the argument.



The Nazis were routinely censored. Hitler himself brought up the fact of this censorship in his debates and used it as justification to censor others. The one time censorship ought to have worked, it didn’t.

It’s a good point, but as I was trying to say it’s addressing something else, which isn’t happening. The censure which is going on in the U.K. is in respect of incitement to violence, or racial prejudice. There is also an issue around harassment and keeping the peace, but this is a side issue.
Should we have the freedom to insight people into violence, or racial prejudice?
Should our freedom of speech extend to being able to tell people to kick vulnerable people in the balls, when they need to use the lavatory, on a public platform.

Also there is the issue, when this extends into politics of populists exploiting the duty of impartiality on media broadcasters. Farage is a skilled operator in this regard, he will get his followers to spread a malicious rumour across social media, for example two tier policing. Eventually it will become widespread enough that media broadcasters will report on it. Then Farage will be invited onto TV to discuss it. He will misrepresent facts around the issue and when challenged, say I’m just asking questions, questions which the people are asking. On the assumption that he’s a man of the people, speaking for them. Then the next day newspapers lead by the Daily Mail will splash their front pages with disinformation about two tier policing. Papers funded by dark money, with shady interests around smearing the government (always left wing, or socialist, never on the right). For the purpose of installing Farage into government so the business interests can extract wealth from the population, spread corruption and rule by divide and rule principles.

Well, I don’t believe incitement is a real thing, so the answer for me is yes. However, if incitement was possible, you could just as easily incite them to peace and love, incite them to change their minds, incite them to join your side. So why don’t you just do that instead of violating everyone’s rights and shrinking the margins of everyone’s existence?

That’s such a vapid response, or should I say vampiric response. It doesn’t deserve a response.

That’s because you don’t have one.

Well, I don’t believe incitement is a real thing, so the answer for me is yes. However, if incitement was possible, you could just as easily incite them to peace and love, incite them to change their minds, incite them to join your side. So why don’t you just do that instead of violating everyone’s rights and shrinking the margins of everyone’s existence? — NOS4A2

If incitement is a real thing not all incitement is equal. If incitement is real then certain things would seem easier to incite than others, no? Someone who is in a highly emotional state of anger who is also full of hatred towards someone or something then it is easier to incite them to violence towards it. That is, if we are supposing its possible to incite at all then I think you also have to suppose not all incitement is equal in the effort required.
I dont see a problem with that, since its easily observed in instances of what people call “incitement”. A soldier is much more easily incited to violence than a pacifist monk and so on.
So to answer your question about inciting people to peace rather than conflict, it is because people in a frenzy or charged environment like a protest are easier to incite to violence than to peace.
At least thats the answer if we presuppose incitement is possible.