In the Freedom on the Net 2025 report, the UK scored 76/100, while China scored 9/100—one of the worst results globally. I do not believe these countries are comparable (although Freedom House did lower the UK’s score, partly due to the rise in criminal prosecutions for online speech — meaning the UK’s problem is not a hoax).
indeed, 12,183 arrests were made in 2023 for the "improper use of a public electronic communications network" — an extremely high number. however, the phrase "arrested for free speech" is too vague: upon closer examination, I could not find a clear line between arrests for overt threats, obscenity, "gross insults", false reports and certain forms of harassment — and expression of opinion or "free speech". I am by no means trying to justify state coercion; yet countering, say, physical threats does not merely curtail free speech — it literally protects it, based on your own definition. I'm not saying that there is no problem here, but that I'd wish to have the better numbers. I do also agree with you, that at least some of these cases are likely far-fetched — or downright nonsence: no one should be arrested for insults. It reminds me of how, in France, there is a criminal penalty for insulting a French politician.
We all police our speech.
talking about policing thoughts — I really don't see a future, where nobody controls themselves, neither desirable, nor safe, nor productive, nor pleasant. even right-wing libertarians argue that freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility.
Ultimately its good to have the tools even when you dont need them. By the time you need them its usually too late.
talking about the tools — I have already expressed my skepticism regarding this argument, which reminds me more of a slippery slope.
In the Freedom on the Net 2025 report, the UK scored 76/100, while China scored 9/100—one of the worst results globally. I do not believe these countries are comparable (although Freedom House did lower the UK’s score, partly due to the rise in criminal prosecutions for online speech — meaning the UK’s problem is not a hoax).
indeed, 12,183 arrests were made in 2023 for the "improper use of a public electronic communications network" — an extremely high number. however, the phrase "arrested for free speech" is too vague: upon closer examination, I could not find a clear line between arrests for overt threats, obscenity, "gross insults", false reports and certain forms of harassment — and expression of opinion or "free speech". I am by no means trying to justify state coercion; yet countering, say, physical threats does not merely curtail free speech — it literally protects it, based on your own definition. I'm not saying that there is no problem here, but that I'd wish to have the better numbers. I do also agree with you, that at least some of these cases are likely far-fetched — or downright nonsence: no one should be arrested for insults. It reminds me of how, in France, there is a criminal penalty for insulting a French politician.
talking about policing thoughts — I really don't see a future, where nobody controls themselves, neither desirable, nor safe, nor productive, nor pleasant. even right-wing libertarians argue that freedom goes hand in hand with responsibility.
talking about the tools — I have already expressed my skepticism regarding this argument, which reminds me more of a slippery slope.