"...may find unpalletable- without the risk of a life sentence in disgusting jails."
I take it unpalletable is something that won’t fit on a pallet. But more seriously why do you use hyperbole so lavishly. The maximum penalty for these “unpalatable” laws is 7 years. Secondly there does exist Australian sedition law, apparently substantially similar to the new anti-sedition legislation. So why the fuss?
“As a first priority "systems" should be able to evolve and its citizens should always be allowed to speak their mind freely.”
Don’t know what process you have in mind for “evolving” legislation but while our parliamentarians like to think of themselves (rightly so) as legislators then that evolutionary process is always in play.
Speaking one’s mind freely in a place like the US, where there are no laws on sedition*, by crying out FIRE! at say a crowded theatre, may well get you incarcerated if not locked up in a mental asylum, provided of course a vigilant police office didn’t put a bullet through your head in the theatre. So that on the face of it is a potentially dangerous freedom to have in terms of concern for one’s fellow citizens. (and perhaps also for one’s own wellbeing i.e. for those who might get the urge to say whatever they please).
* The Patriot Act sails close to the wind as anti-sedition law but having rejected the thinking (i.e. trying to avert the anarchy of the French Revolution spreading to America) behind the 1798 Alien and Sedition Acts on the grounds that it challenged the Bill of Rights the yanks have always been very wary of anti-sedition laws except in time of war.
