Comment by kingkongjaffa

1 day ago

> Especially in the UK which operates as a paternalistic state and enjoys authoritarian support across all parties.

This seemed strange to point out. It’s not really any more or less “paternalistic” than most western nations including the US.

Folks in the United States aren't routinely arrested for Facebook posts.

  • The AP News was just kicked out of press conferences for not using the government-preferred term for the Gulf of Mexico. The new director of the FBI is pledging to go after members of the press that he doesn't like. The US is jumping headfirst in the "bad speech isn't free" direction in the past month.

  • Of course they are. Violent threats and admitting illegal activity on social media can lead to arrests in the US. By being so unspecific your comment does not really foster good discussion on the topic. You should describe what kind of posts they are being arrested for and which laws/protections in the UK you are specifically criticizing.

  • There are limits to speech in every country, including the US. What I always find baffling is the sheer arrogance of Americans, that the only way to be a free and democratic country is their way, to the extent that they send their elected representatives to Germany of all places to implicitly argue for the legalisation of the Hitler salute.

    Meanwhile their country has slid into fascism. Sad and tragic.

If you see a red car driving down the street do you not call it red because there are many other red cars? They're adding color (pun intended) to their description of the general bias of the UK government. What you're doing is called Whataboutism - the argument that others are doing something similar or as bad in different contexts. It doesn't make what the UK is doing any less bad for citizens (and non-citizens) privacy or data sovereignty.

  • You don't say it's "especially" red then do you. The comparison was started by the GP.