Someday we need to kill this myth, the wave of fascisms that appeared in Europe (Italy, Germany, Spain, Romania) are more of a cultural and economic reaction to the destruction of the Great War and not due to "unlimited free speech".

Free speech does not amplify or cultivate hate, it lets it fester in dark areas until it explodes when a crisis happens (which is what is happening currently).

Free speech and open discourse serves as a pressure valve release and self-correcting mechanism where by impopular or "untolerable" but common opinions have to be dealt with i.e the migration backlash in Europe

Protests are pressure valves, not tweets.

Please tell me how did the recent wave of Gen-Z protests start, hw did the Arab spring start?

Tweets (and other censored social media) for better or for worse have been at the center of impactful political movements and protests

Again, you are stripping all context and content. You are pretending that protest organising and calling for the burning down of a building populated with asylum seekers are the same thing. I vehemently reject this facetious framing.

The house of lords is a stamping system at this point, and maybe a stopgap to authoritarianism. All power resides in the House of Commons which is elected

The true issue lies in the fact that the Westminster style of government is de facto an elective tyranny, with no real checks and balances other than the misused ECHR

If this were true, the papers wouldn't have run an article yesterday bitching about the lords sending back the workers rights bill again.

The commons may _eventually_ overrule them, but it takes time and costs political capital.

The majority of our population want more law, more rules, more restrictions : they don't see the value or enjoyment in doing something, so they don't think anyone should be able to do it.

Ask the average joe whether or not cars should prevent drivers from being able to "chose" to break the speed limit: You'll get a resounding "yes" 8/10 times - the value of freewill seems to be increasing lost on my country men.

I actually dont think your comment invalidates mine. The house of lords cannot really do anything than be a pain in the ass by sending the bill 3 times. The commons will eventually outrule them if they have sufficient political capital.

My comment on elective tyranny comes from the fact that if a trifecta of: leader/party mps/house of lords are aligned there is little to stop them.

This done I think all of the debates around authoritarianism and censorship put too much blame on the government which seems to represent the views of the majority of people rather well. I think it also comes from the fact that the median age is older and older people are more conservative in their choices and thus more willing to put limitations on everything (and also the fucking boomers vote as a 25% bloc which imposes their choices on the remaining poplation i.e the infamous triple lock of retirements)

There is a big elephant behind this article. There is no way for the EU to actually enact any meaningful change because:

- American big tech is too entrentched in all bureaucracies of Europe, and the few that try to change face a mountain of obstacles (Linux lol)

- because of the Ukraine war, idiotic energy policy in Germany (anti-nuclear + pro-LNG), political lock in France and the EU Comission blind Russophobia (Kaja Kallas comes to mind), we have come to be increasingly reliant in fossil products coming from the US (or other eager US allies like Qatar and the gulf states) which teamed up with the ideological turn of the current US administration means that any semblance of a trial to try to appear "sovereign" will end up in retaliatory consequences and another humiliating treaty where the EU has to acquiesce silently

- the gerontocratic and ossified EU bureaucracy (same adjectives apply to the UK) knows nothing other than to regulate, not to build and thus there is no way to meaningfully build infrastructures to counter both the US and the Chinese

And of you complain, or in any way come against the government then they are justified in silencing you, in the name of human rights and democracy of course not like China or Russia

Sorry my bad, I will try to change the title

No worries. Title change worked. I commentee because "secretly" is really the key word.

Not clear if this means without a warrant.

Secretly accessing premises to fit bugs has been happening for decades in the US (and other countries?). Watch documentaries about the FBI vs the mafia. But, crucially, there are/were very strict rules and a high threshold.

No it's kinda expected from the EU, Chat Control and other free speech restricting matters have been passed/trying to pass under the guise of protection.

I think he is mentioning my comment and another one mainly, I personally decry all kinds of censorship, not only the Russian one. Its just one just cannot be taken seriously when defending "hate speech laws" is ok when they protect things I agree with (lgbt rights), but then decry the same thing done with things I dont agree with (lgbt rghts). The main counterargument is the kind of claiming hate speech defend "human rights" as some kind of universal moral good and "protecting vulnerable groups" but these laws dont seem to do any of those, they cynically cloak themselve in such purposes but eventually are used for nefarious purposes and to increase state overreach (see the infamous PATRIOT act).

Idk, they are sadly using the same tools Western democracies have been using recently. One cannot throw a stone from a crystal palace.