Top legal thinkers on cancel culture fear: free speech is now seriously under attack.


Top legal thinkers on cancel culture fear: free speech is now seriously under attack.

A NEW REPORT by one of Britain’s most prominent legal brains has urged for a new law to guarantee freedom of expression.

The paper, written by top QC Frances Hoare with a foreword by former Supreme Court judge Lord Sumption, details recent hate crime legislation and workplace practices as an assault on freedom of speech. It comes amid fears that woke institutions and activists’ so-called “cancel culture” is causing people to lose their employment, be barred from speaking, face legal action, or be blacklisted from social media platforms.

The situation was exposed in February when the Freedom of Speech Union (FSU), founded by journalist Toby Young, announced that in its first year, it had supplied legal assistance to between 500 and 700 individuals.

Laurence Fox, the head of the Reclaim Party, commissioned the newest study to provide a neutral legal opinion on the present condition of freedom of speech in the United Kingdom.

“I have never seen such restriction of free speech, such censorship of absolutely moderate thought, and probably most perniciously, self-censorship,” he remarked. New speech codes — vocabulary, syntax, pronouns, and so on – are imposed on common speech.

“Every day, those who seek outrage everywhere find offence everywhere, and there is a war being conducted on language and our right to use it.

“For fear of repercussions, the meanings of our words are twisted and contorted till they become lodged in the mouth.”

The 50-page research proposes six eforms to provide UK residents with the same protection as the US Constitution’s First Amendment.

The Scottish Hate Crime Bill should be cancelled, and the police should lose the power to investigate so-called “non-crime hate events,” according to the report.

Offenses of inciting racial hatred should be modified to equate them with offenses of inciting hatred based on religious belief or sexual orientation, requiring that they be committed only when there is a deliberate purpose to incite hatred.

It has been suggested that social media website ‘hosts’ of ‘organic’ content that is not edited or published by them (in law) should not be allowed to remove statements unless their publication is or may be a criminal or civil infraction.

Employers should no longer be able to fire workers for “Brinkwire Summary News,” according to the report.


Leave A Reply