They are a democracy in a sense that people are allowed to vote. But do people get access to all the information they need to meaningfully vote?

And, frankly, stuff like ASBO makes it hard to take UK as a good example of a free society.

Meaningfully voting requires more than just access to information though.

More information with less analysis of it will make less meaningful votes

There was lots of information about Brexit for example but a good portion of it was made up

"Not really. UK has far more limits on speech than the US but is just as much of a Democracy as the US."

They have a literal "House of Lords" which is "... by appointment or by heredity or official function."[1]

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_of_Lords

So you are attempting to make the point that the UK is not an equivalent democracy?

The house of lords can not create bills nor stop them. They can look over the elected parliament's shoulders and whine, that's it. It is a vestigial leaving of the monarchy system that, like the Monarchs themselves, the UK keeps because it's cute.

While in the US, un-elected corporations do very much the same thing, except when they whine, they get their way.

> While in the US, un-elected corporations do very much the same thing, except when they whine, they get their way.

Thanks god that never happens in Britain.

I'm sure it does but in the UK, there is no Citizens United, where the Supreme Corporate Court of America (LLC) decided $$$ = speech, more $$$ = more speech, thus infinite $$$ to political campaigns = ALL GOOD HOMIES (This isn't even satire, this is actually their logic here).

Let's get real, it isn't the fact that corps lobby goverments that is the problem, there problem is when they can give unlimited cash bribes, like that can in the US. But they can not in the UK.

When you really start examining it, the US democrazy(sic) doesn't seem all that exceptional.

"Democracy and free speech are intrinsically linked."

Yes, really, because an important part of the democratic process is that the opposition can express their ideas, criticism and disagreement without fearing fines or prison.

Yes, in the UK, this verbal playing field is narrower than in the US, but still fairly wide. Corbynistas could advocate for nationalization and open borders without being jumped on by uniformed thugs.

Look to places like Russia and Turkey to see a severely constricted field, with the opposition risking their freedom by doubting the Dear Leader.

the erosion of free speech and individual freedom is what allows the institutions of democracy to atrophy

It's patently not, and that's the parent comment's point. Free speech is highly restricted in the United Kingdom.

It's not highly restricted. It's a bit more restricted than in the USA and there are plenty of brits that think that's dumb, meaningless and just creates drama whilst simultaneously distracting the police from solving actual crimes.

Free speech is slightly restricted.

Otherwise, you run out of words to describe most other countries.