BTW:

We need to be careful with the use of the word "Kudos."

It can have different meanings. It doesn't necessarily
mean "Well done!"

It can also be sarcastic to finally highlight something
acceptable like:

"Kudos to you for coming to work today!

We should be careful of those who on the one hand demand "freedom", be it freedom of speech, or freedom of action, then in an instant would recklessly use that power to attack and deny others not of their mind, their basic freedoms. The extreme are well known for demanding these rights, and then exercising those freedoms to target and attack others, firstly with "hate speak" and when in a position to do so, with "direct action". The extremists will qualify their action against undesirables as necessary for the good of society. BTW, the extreme once in control soon deny those basic freedoms they were so demanding of for themselves, to others not of their liking.

Dear Paul,

Free speech has always had limitations in civilized
societies. We've had laws against slander, hate speech,
and so on. The best way to stop speech that is hateful
is to counter it with better, more reasonable ideas.

We should be able to self-regulate. Rational people
learn to recognize hurtful or hate speech in various
contexts - especially if it becomes hurtful or harmful
to others. It should be frowned upon.

Free speech relies on honesty and respect. Words are the
manifestations of ideology. That's why we do have laws
and institutions that protect all of us, and encourage us
to strive for principles of equal rights, self-determination.
The strengthening, promotion, encouragement, and respect,
for human rights and for freedoms without discrimination.

Good governments strive towards these ends. Totalitarian regimes
don't.

Luckily for us in this country - we have governments
who believe in taking appropriate measure to strengthen our
freedoms.

They believe in trying
to achieve international co-operation in solving
domestic and international problems of an economic, social,
cultural and humanitarian character and to promote, encourage,
and respect human rights and freedoms for all - without
discrimination.

And for that we should all be grateful.

Foxy seems to be saying that even though the UK has occupied it's Territory for 12,000 years- it was originally founded based on a wide? arrange of ice age peoples- therefore it is a migrant nation and should allow all migrants- independent of the continuity of culture that has lasted for that 12,000 years.

The best lies often contain some truth

Foxy seems to agree with the Communist Nihilists that culture should be destroyed. At least in the British Isles- I think that is what the Communists Woke-ists label a racist micro-aggression.

As someone else said "the local community was never asked" when the liberal governments the uni-party (Labor and the Global Capitalists) pushed immigration on them.
_____________

Paul1405 seems to be saying that one tyranny justifies another tyranny.

So we see that he supports tyranny- this is the sort of thinking in the Gay, Feminist, so called Anti-Racism movements that believe that any sort of dirty tactics are justified because "they know they are right"- Stalin believed similar things- isn't this sort of the definition of wrongness- I could be wrong. On the other hand those less communist or totalitarian views believe that while all systems of community structure (loosely government) are imperfect there are principles that create better outcomes than others. Periodically we can review these principles to determine the inconsistencies and debate and analyse them to remediate- this is the scientific method- but that doesn't mean that our society should be a slave to science or scientists- just as in science individuals can vote according to their conscience and their self interest in spite of the scientific evidence.

There is also the role of nature in society- our evolutionary roots- which communism and woke-ism seems to deny in favour of seeing society as exclusively a blank slate/ nihilistic slate- why do communists do this- what is their purpose- to create confusion to separate people from their wise elders their families their strength their past and their future- for totalitarian power.

The tree of life appears to have many contradictions with communism- territorialism, parochialism, tribalism, traditionalism, survivalism- so one might conclude as Nietzsche did that communist nihilism is Anti-Life.

Perhaps Paul1405 is Anti-Life- as he seems to believe similar things to Stalin.

There are times that perhaps the views of Stalin need to be repressed. As they say there is a time for everything under heaven.

Sometimes the principles that are held as cannon are in opposition and we must use intelligence to navigate these dangerous waters. At times we must also use instinct to decide- my instinct is that communism and woke-ism and anti-racism are extremely dangerous forces in western society.

What do you think?

One way to manage a debate is to allow all speakers to have equal time without interruptions and eject any people that refuse to follow these rules of communication hygiene. Sometimes it's possible to provide further clarification by written (or other) form as part of the debate- perhaps with a word limit- but allowing links to external sources. Set the expectation that some of the views may be confronting, controversial, offensive, insulting, dangerous but this is not a reason to stop the speaker from speaking for their time. It is necessary to explore dangerous ideas- because it is necessary for life

I try to avoid sarcasm or irony in posting here because it tends to muddy the intentions- when I want to clear peoples eyes. Kudos to those doing the same- ttbn, and others.