Trump’s War on Ireland Isn’t About Free Speech. It’s About Hate.

They say it’s about liberty. But when speech is used to punch down, what you’re defending isn’t freedom, it’s abuse.

By Sean Ash

We always hear that freedom of speech is sacred. That it’s the foundation of democracy. That without it, we’d be living under tyranny. And I agree with that, in principle.

But what happens when that freedom becomes a weapon? Not to challenge power or speak truth to authority, but to target the powerless? That’s the real question. And that’s what Ireland is grappling with right now.

I support Ireland’s efforts to modernise its hate speech laws. I support their decision to say enough is enough when speech crosses the line from opinion into incitement. Because for all the shouting about censorship, what’s really happening here is a society choosing to protect its most vulnerable citizens. And I don’t think that’s authoritarian. I think that’s progress.

In the United States, the Second Amendment was written in 1791. It gave citizens the right to bear arms. Why? Because they had just fought off British rule and feared tyranny. The logic was simple: if the government ever turned on the people, the people should have the means to resist.

It was about resisting power, not enforcing it.

But look around now. Guns aren’t being used to stand up to tyranny. They’re being used against each other. School shootings. Hate crimes. Domestic terrorism. Mass violence carried out by citizens, not governments. The right that was meant to protect people has become something people need protection from.

The same thing is happening with free speech. It was meant to protect dissent. To allow people to speak up against injustice. But today, it’s being used to dehumanise minorities, mock the marginalised, and spread conspiracy and hate. Speech that was once a shield for the voiceless has become a stick for the loud to beat the vulnerable with.

And here’s where the inconsistency becomes impossible to ignore.

The same people who claim to be die-hard defenders of free speech are usually the first to call for strict border controls. They’re not shouting for freedom of movement. They don’t believe people fleeing war, poverty, or persecution should be able to cross borders. They say that must be regulated. Controlled. That it can cause harm.

So let’s get this straight. You believe people should be free to say anything they want, even if it’s offensive or harmful. But people can’t move freely, even when it might save their life? That’s not a love of freedom. That’s selective liberty.

They understand that freedom of movement has consequences. It might strain infrastructure. Housing. Public services. They’re not wrong to care about that. But if they accept that freedom has limits when it causes harm, why don’t they apply the same logic to speech?

Because the truth is, hate speech has consequences too. It isolates people. It emboldens abusers. It normalises cruelty. It’s not harmless. It does damage.

Now I know what some people will say. That I’m being a hypocrite. That I support freedom of movement but want to limit speech. But that’s not a contradiction. It’s a matter of purpose.

Freedom of movement is about survival. About hope. About escaping war, famine, persecution. It’s about building a life. Not taking someone else’s down.

Hate speech, on the other hand, is about targeting people. It’s about stripping others of their dignity. Making them afraid to exist. That’s not freedom. That’s domination. That’s oppression disguised as opinion.

And freedom of movement already has rules. You need a visa. A reason. You get screened. Checked. Turned away if you don’t qualify. No one’s calling for open borders without structure.

So why shouldn’t speech have rules too, especially when it’s used to threaten or dehumanise?

I’m not against freedom. I’m against cruelty being dressed up as liberty.

And that’s exactly why I support Ireland’s hate speech laws. Not because I want to silence people, but because I want to protect people from abuse hiding behind the mask of free expression. This isn’t about punishing disagreement. It’s about stopping the slow drip of hatred that poisons public life.

We’ve seen what happens when protections are taken away.

Look at what happened when Elon Musk took over Twitter. He stripped away the moderation systems that had been built to stop hate from spiralling. What followed was predictable. Slurs returned in full force. Holocaust denial resurfaced. Trans people were targeted. Hate speech surged almost overnight.

Why? Because the message was clear. There would be no consequences anymore.

When you remove protections, people don’t rise to freedom. They test how much hate they can get away with.

We didn’t have to imagine what it would look like. We watched it happen in real time.

And the people who suffer most in that kind of environment aren’t the ones with power. They’re the ones already clinging on, migrants, LGBTQ+ youth, disabled people, religious minorities, working-class communities just trying to get through the day without being made into a punchline or a target.

Free speech should protect the powerless, not give more power to those already drowning out everyone else.

You can’t build a fair society by giving more volume to the loudest voice in the room. You can’t build peace by treating hate like just another opinion. And you can’t defend liberty by abandoning those who need it most.

I don’t support hate speech laws because I want people silenced. I support them because I want everyone, including those who are too often drowned out or abused, to have the right to speak without fear.

That’s not censorship. That’s justice.

And this is exactly why politicians like Nigel Farage and Reform UK want to scrap the Equality Act. They aren’t saying, “Let’s get rid of it because it doesn’t work.” They want it gone so they can criticise minorities and get away with it.

They want to strip the law of its power to protect people, not because equality has gone too far, but because it’s getting in the way of their ability to punch down. It’s not about free debate. It’s about removing the last legal shield between hate and the people it harms.

So no, I won’t back down from defending these protections. Because the moment we let them go, history shows us exactly what comes next. And it’s never freedom. It’s never equality. It’s fear.

And I won’t be silent about that either.

Fascists should be locked up. Racists should be locked up. People who incite hatred against others because of where they were born should be locked up.

And if you don’t like me saying that?

Then have a taste of your own “freedom of speech.”