There is a growing campaign to limit free speech in Britain
People who say there has never been "any such thing anywhere" are part of this attempt to change the freedoms we have

Here is a question,if we didn't have free speech in Britain , in the past and in our lifetimes, what was it not permissible to say in Britain in the past?

you haven't answered the question pineapple

of course you don't have to

sometimes the question is more important than the answer

more enlightening

we must be very careful not to lose the freedoms that we have enjoyed and that were fought for by our ancestors

you see it shows the mentality and the tactics of some

you ask them a question and then they say are you trying to silence us

well that's pretty silly isn't it

pineapple still hasnt answered the question

that's ok, he doesn't have to

now we get the silly faces

still no answer from pineapple

Here is the question again

If we didn't have free speech in Britain, in the past and in our lifetimes,what was it not permissible to say in Britain in the past?

still no answer from pineapple

Sorry, but I've answered. I'm not responsible for you liking or not liking what I've written, nor am I at your service to continually return until you get an answer you do like. If you really do crave knowledge of what wasn't permissable to say in the past I could point you in the direction of the library or maybe even google.

still no answer from pineapple

that's ok he doesn't have to answer, sometimes the question is more important

more enlightening

can anyone else answer perhaps, lets see...

In my opinion, freedom of speech is nothing more than a political tool. It is an illusion. You'll be allowed this freedom as long as it suits the political elites of the day. If it doesn't, there will be some excuse for why you can't say something.

apropos of nothing much



sea lioning (also spelled sealioning and sea-lioning) is a type of Internet trolling which consists of bad-faith requests for evidence, or repeated questions, the purpose of which is not clarification or elucidation, but rather an attempt to derail a discussion or to wear down the patience of one's opponent. The troll who uses this tactic also uses fake civility and feigns offense so as to discredit their target.[1][2][3][4] The term arises from a 2014 edition of the webcomic Wondermark, where a character expresses an unsubstantiated dislike of sea lions and a passing sea lion repeatedly asks the character to explain

and did so and were free to do so
any other examples?

everyone in Britain was free to carry out a critical investigation of the holocaust
and have done

If the object of the debate is to decide whether one's freedom of speech is being taken away. Then the first thing to establish is what could be said before that can't be said now.
In this respect lfc1971's question has to be addressed for the debate to have any meaning.   

Here it is again:
Here is a question,if we didn't have free speech in Britain , in the past and in our lifetimes, what was it not permissible to say in Britain in the past?

The question must be answered by anyone who wants to be taken seriously if they claim free speech is not being taken away.

Looks like PP missed the chance to use his own time frame there.

Let's say before all this PC nonsense really got going, pre 1997.

One sec though. Just want to be clear. Are some on here thinking that I reckon nothing has changed in the last 200 years regarding censorship? If so .



You couldn't libel someone 50 years ago. Ergo, there was no such thing as free speech.



Alternatively, you can get away with a lot more in terms of blasphemy these days than you could back then. These things are always fluid and will respond to where the pressure is being exerted.



But my point, and my only point made is that there never has been completely free speech and for pretty jeffin obvious reasons.




The only ones who seem upset by that basic truth appear to be the ones who would desperately want to say some pretty horrid things.