Honestly, this is just kind of shallow conversation if you don’t engage honestly with it.
Both US and UK societies have the general concept of freedom on speech - you are free to say what you want for the most part, subject to some specific limits on that right where the speech infringes on someone else’s rights.
These rights are codified, came about, and are implemented slightly differently - but in practice the difference you’re identifying is really more about what the respective societies define as acceptable.
In recent cases, the people who’ve been jailed have been done so for (among other things) incitement to racial hatred - things like public posts encouraging people to commit specific acts. The UK considers this outside the bounds of acceptable free speech.
The US maybe considers this boundary elsewhere, but it is clear that some forms of expression can constitute harassment or other criminality even in the US.
The interesting discussion is the bit in the middle - how do we build a messy consensus that deals with our differences and protects as many people’s rights to live peacefully as possible, while still allowing others to speak freely and without fear. A discussion from the starting point of “I can say whatever I want” when it is demonstrably not true doesn’t really engage with that.
The US is indeed a wonderful and amazing place full of incredible people. It would be even more wonderful and amazing with occasional bouts of self-reflection.
Both US and UK societies have the general concept of freedom on speech - you are free to say what you want for the most part, subject to some specific limits on that right where the speech infringes on someone else’s rights.
These rights are codified, came about, and are implemented slightly differently - but in practice the difference you’re identifying is really more about what the respective societies define as acceptable.
In recent cases, the people who’ve been jailed have been done so for (among other things) incitement to racial hatred - things like public posts encouraging people to commit specific acts. The UK considers this outside the bounds of acceptable free speech.
The US maybe considers this boundary elsewhere, but it is clear that some forms of expression can constitute harassment or other criminality even in the US.
The interesting discussion is the bit in the middle - how do we build a messy consensus that deals with our differences and protects as many people’s rights to live peacefully as possible, while still allowing others to speak freely and without fear. A discussion from the starting point of “I can say whatever I want” when it is demonstrably not true doesn’t really engage with that.
The US is indeed a wonderful and amazing place full of incredible people. It would be even more wonderful and amazing with occasional bouts of self-reflection.