>In addition to that, America is a country that works forwards from principles much more often than European nations, which very often work backwards from objectives.

Have any examples to back this up?

I dont even necessarily disagree with your original argument, but can we get away from the Europe vs America debate that always pops up on this board as if they can be compared in a reasonable way? Europe is made up of a bunch of independent countries alot of which have objectives and principles that conflict with other entities within Europe, let alone outside of it

The "America vs Europe debate" only ever pops up when an American comes into a thread telling everyone how wrong they are. As you say it is ironic because the position that there is one "Europe" to compare the US to is one that can only be formed in an environment of ignorance. Asking why was at some point useful, but given the pernicious nature of these discussions and the vehemence with which they are repeated we have to assume they are not going to go away (unless perhaps we ignore them).

> The "America vs Europe debate" only ever pops up when an American comes into a thread telling everyone how wrong they are.

European posters do this all the time in health care discussions.

Because US healthcare suck.

It's a fact.

It sucks for most, it is amazing for the rich.

Free speech.

What about it?

>>In addition to that, America is a country that works forwards from principles much more often than European nations, which very often work backwards from objectives.

>Have any examples to back this up?

This is an example to backup the statement. The US starts from a strong principle of free speech. European countries generally don't value this as highly, and will censor speech if they feel it is necessary.

It should go together with respect

Ideally, yes.. but it shouldn't be a condition for it.

> To frame the right to free speech in regards to whether or not it is "working out" is not a particularly American frame of reference. The principle that individuals should express themselves as they see fit, and that this is the foundation for a free and open society, is essentially square one.

When I said "working out", I wasn't talking so much about which effects free speech is having (although that is a question well worth asking) but more about whether speech in the US really is as free as it was ~4 years go.

Could being attacked on twitter by the president for something you say not be construed as a very real retaliation by the administration and thus a curtailment of free speech?

You aren’t being thrown in prison or “disappearing” for saying something counter to the president’s point of view. Even with free speech rights there are still limits though. I can’t go around making violent threats to people without some repercussions.

> Could being attacked on twitter by the president for something you say not be construed as a very real retaliation by the administration and thus a curtailment of free speech?

No, someone talking to you in a public forum, even in a hostile fashion, is not a curtailment of free speech. It’s just free speech.

Free speech isn’t the right to not have your feelings hurt.

If Trump attacking people worked on Twitter, there wouldn’t be any democrats left in office at this point.

Being attacked on Twitter by the president would be the best thing that ever happened to me, or to any blogger or news site.