Daniel Hannan: Trump is a person who is in my eyes but it doesn’t stop him that he makes sense about the death of a free language in Britain

Many of us feel conflict with the idea that Donald Trump’s administration seeks to relate a trade agreement with a free language in Britain.

The British hate that it is pushed by foreigners. At the same time, however, most of us know that US administration makes sense to lose freedom of expression in this country.

We went, in one generation, from being a place to say that you liked, provided you have stopped not achieving, intimidation or incitement to be a place where you can feel your collar to criticize the local council.

No matter how we are outraged by lectures from the border, most of us will feel the sense of shame that it came to it. We must guarantee freedom of speech, not as a service to our American cousins, but because it was our invention in the first place.

On Sunday, the US Department of State issued an extraordinary statement, announcing that the administration was “concerned about the freedom of expression in the United Kingdom.”

He referred to Libya Tosichi-Bolt, who was persecuted two years ago for standing outside the abortion clinic in Bournemut, holding a sign that said, “Here to talk if you want.”

Last month, she spoke with the Magistrate Court for a predictable violation of the buffer zone, and the sentence should be issued on Friday.

Dr. Tossychi-Bolt is the reason for the celebrity for various conservative groups in the United States, which see it as a persecuted Christian and both a shocking example of how John Milton and JS Mill’s land turned his back on free expression.

The left, who have already hated the Trump administration, are united from his presumption and colonial thinking. Because they see international relations as a hierarchy of power and oppression, the United States is one of the few countries they can feel good.

The most interesting thing is that they do not mind causing human rights abuses in other countries. They usually use trade policy as a lever when it comes to, say, the repression of dissidents in Belarus or the arrest of journalists in Iran.

But they are trying to understand that the older Republicans also feel censorship in the country they consider to be a fund of their own freedoms.

Deputies on labor issues, quite fairly, against the ban on girls’ education in Afghanistan. Well, free expression is the most universal value for American conservatives.

He was also seen here. We clung to free language during our conflicts with the Nazis and Soviet Councils. Indeed, we clung to this with special cruelty, precisely because we thought that it made our society better than them.

Then, since the end of the 1990s, we have adopted a number of laws that have increased the imagined sensitivity of the approved minorities through everything else – a free contract, a free association and, of course, free language.

Today, grandmothers can visit police for making rude remarks about a local advisor.

A journalist can have ROZZZERS for more than a year, which is offered by British Muslims, to a large extent.

The schoolboy can be recorded as a racist to complain that her classmates do not speak English.

The baby can be excluded from a nursery for “sexual abuse and gender identity”. (I do not make this: the Department of Education this week confirmed that the child was “aged three years” was removed from a public school for this very violation in the educational 2022/23.)

All these cases come, so to speak, from one political direction. They are all particularly outrageous when they are installed next to the hatred we hear on anti-Zrael marches, or abuse, which, until recently, have been able to leave eco-campaign.

But a really terrible thing is not that we have a two -level justice system.

These are generally such things in this country.

If you are somewhere near my age or older (I was born in 1971), you have linked such a policy with totalitarian states. “It’s a free country,” we told each other. It’s been a long time since I heard, as any British man uses this phrase without irony.

It was bad enough to face our record Vice President of the United States, JD Vance.

Asking the sources of Trump administration “without free trade without free language” is a final humiliation because it blows us by authoritarian states.

We can no longer pretend that our free expression restrictions are just public order, slander or harassment.

We were exposed to the world as what we knew that: A small, authoritarian nation where police regularly participate in cases that do not concern no more than to offend the language.

By the way, I write as an ancient critic Donald Trump. I believe that his defect of the character and his disdain for the Constitution make him unfit for office; Its attacks on Canada and Denmark disgusting; His willingness to bid Vladimir Putin is humiliated; And his trade policy threatens a global recession.

I do not even believe that he has a great interest in free language, at least not when he does not like his content. But nothing of it means that he is wrong about censorship in Britain. If freedom of speech means something, it means that we do not like to speak.

The Trump administration has created some rather unpleasant Britons.

He seeks to rehabilitate Andrew Tate, the so -called “king of toxic masculinity.” He convinced himself that Tommy Robinson was in prison for saying that he was talking about unpopular things about Islam, not because he repeatedly opposed the court orders in the case of defamation.

But here’s a difficult thing that needs to be said. Being unbroken does not deprive you of equal rights in accordance with the law.

Both Tate and Robinson can justly claim the victims of the two -level justice system, in the sense that they were not so rigid if their political thoughts were more fashionable.

A man can be a victim and a villain at a time.

To endure unpleasant people is as good a test as any open society. A free country allows people to do all sorts of offensive things, provided they stop physical intimidation.

If you want to burn a copy of the Qur’an either to claim that the Holocaust has never been, or to claim that gay -sinks should be criminalized or desire to be a painful death on the monarch, you are talking about things that most people consider to be disagreeing.

But you do not threaten anyone.

It is extremely that the leader of the Conservative Party had to say that she did not want Britain to “chase people for herself”, as Kamy Badenok did yesterday. But we have achieved that.

We have forgotten the most basic prerequisite for freedom, namely that it concerns people we consider carefully depressed. Donald Trump is, on my eyes, a person who is confused.

But it does not prevent him from having a point.

• Lord Hannan from Kingsclere – President of the Free Trade Institute