The UK is shaping a future of precrime and dissent management (2025)

And look at you - making incorrect assertions about both free speech zones (they are still used) and your central point about the arrest of a protestor who it turns out wasn't arrested.

It's sad that you're not going to walk away from this discussion thinking "Huh, maybe I wasn't very well informed, it's pretty terrible in both countries so calling out the UK as significantly worse might actually be wrong" but instead believe you were attacked by unreasonable, tribal British people defending authoritiarianism.

But that's arguing on the internet I guess.

By the way, here's another example of the use free speech zones and the arrests of people for having their say -

https://blockclubchicago.org/2025/11/12/protesters-keep-gett...

"Since state officials created a “free speech zone,” local police continue to make arrests that have “no apparent purpose other than just intimidating people away from that line, and sending a message that they’re going to be controlling the area with force,” said civil rights attorney Joe DiCola."

Suppression of protest is unfortunately a popular thing for governments in a lot of places right now. It's as bad (if not worse) in Australia, where I live, especially in New South Wales where they seem determined to find a pretext to ban any and all marches.

And to make it absolutely clear - I do not support any of it nor am I defending the actions of the UK authorities. Also not a monarchist, that family of parasites needs to be stripped of all powers, lands and assets stolen from the British and other peoples, and I was disgusted by what the British authorities did to suppress dissent leading up to the coronation of King big-ears.

I gave you another example from last year, but it was in an edit so you might have missed it.

> Again, the numerous nationwide protests easily demonstrate that point.

Protest marches occur regularly in the UK as well, so that's evidence it's fine there? People were arrested for protesting at an event, the coronation. This is the same sort of thing free speech zones have been used to suppress in the US. Sure, the last time they were used in the exact same way was probably under Bush Jnr, but they're still used where protest is considered inconvenient (like the ICE protests in the article I linked above).

> not once did I claim the UK was 'significantly worse'

Not with those exact words, but it was heavily implied with your repetition of emphasis on the guy being arrested (or not) for holding a piece of paper.

> being overly defensive about the UK

> Reasonable people wouldn't be this deep into the conversation and would just have agreed, yeah, the British government overreached against protestors and some other examples of overreach appear concerning if indicative of a trend.

> But, nah, let's just defend King and Country without stopping to actually analyze or self-reflect.

Do you have no reading comprehension at all? I have agreed with that, several times. I haven't defended the actions of the UK once. When you directly asked me if it was a problem, I said yes it's awful. The King can go #### himself.

OK, I'm done with this conversation, at some point dang will be along to put an end to it anyway I imagine, as it's fruitless.

It doesn't really matter though, the point was it hasn't been a national issue in over a decade, and that remains the case.

> Protest marches occur regularly in the UK as well, so that's evidence it's fine there?

The point was people were being arrested in the UK simply for holding up signs. You tried to equate free speech zones with that, but as I said it's an entirely unrelated matter, a desperate whataboutism sprung from defensiveness.

> Sure, the last time they were used in the exact same way was probably under Bush Jnr,

So, over a decade ago like I said.

> but they're still used where protest is considered inconvenient (like the ICE protests in the article I linked above).

There are giant protests all over the country. Free speech zones don't make the news because they are not an issue. No one is being impeded.

> Not with those exact words, but it was heavily implied with your repetition of emphasis on the guy being arrested (or not) for holding a piece of paper.

Not at all, you inferred it. I've been consistently clear that I think the UK is going down a bad path but in a very different way from the US, I never said worse.

> I have agreed with that, several times. I haven't defended the actions of the UK once. When you directly asked me if it was a problem, I said yes it's awful.

Honestly, only once that I'm aware of, and I had to drag it out of you. All your posts are pushing back, which gives the impression you want to defend the problems being mentioned.

> OK, I'm done with this conversation, at some point dang will be along to put an end to it anyway I imagine, as it's fruitless.

I shan't expect a reply then. Cheers. Hopefully we can have a more productive discussion on a different topic in the future.