Ask HN: The government of my country blocked VPN access. What should I use?

America's Founders saw civil rights as inherent in the Constitution's framework, rooted in natural law. They added the Bill of Rights as an explicit bulwark. That's why we have the 1st Amendment's free speech, and if that falls, the 2nd Amendment ensures we have guns.

How's that working for you at the moment?

Sorry for the snide comment, but considering the last 6 - 8 months in the US, at least from what is being reported in the outside world, the 1st amendment doesn't seem to be providing much in the way of protection, and unless I'm missing something the general public doesn't seem to have the level of interest that would be required for your 2nd amendment to play out in any meaningful way.

It’s working fantastic. US media is great at generating hysteria (competitive market pressures in the war for attention), but the US is at essentially very little risk for speech suppression at the level of the UK right now.

Only to watch the GOP completely disregard every aspect of it.

UK too, and concerned. I agree that amendment 1 and 2 provisions effectively underpin individual freedom in the US due to founder perspicacity. My fear re US constitutional provision is on separation of powers, and transfer of power. Fortunately Pence held to the constitution. Nobody ever willingly takes their hands of the levers of power!

Yeah just physical suppression with active military patrolling major cities.

> It’s working fantastic.

The ignorance of what's been happening the last few months is ridiculous. Trump and his people have successfully pressured, or denied access, or removed security clearances, or demonetized (public broadcasting), or directly fired, or just called out to cause a hate-storm from his supporters, companies, organizations, individuals.

Oh sure, it is different from the UK: Instead of technical blocks and surveillance this administration targets people and organizations directly.

https://www.ap.org/news-highlights/spotlights/2025/paramount...

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2025/6/11/us-journalist-dropp...

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/11/07/media/trump-cnn-press-con...

https://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/11/the-media-fe...

https://www.npr.org/2025/03/01/g-s1-51489/voice-of-america-b...

https://www.commondreams.org/opinion/corporate-media-caves-t...

I think John Bolton would disagree with you.

The United States, uniquely, guards speech under its 1A, excepting only direct calls to violence. A hypothetical like "we ought to hang <person>, but the police would stop us, so have to draw a new plan first" is protected, a case study in law schools for where liberty draws its line.

If you suppress the avenues for peaceful political change, your courting violent revolution. History bears this out. Each, in its moment, seemed an unthinkable leap—overthrowing monarchs or empires—yet each remade its world.

The saying that history rhymes, not repeats, points to immutable human behavior.

Today, revolutionary pressures simmer. The U.S. saw a peaceful political shift in 2024, enabled by free speech's safety valve. Elsewhere, without such freedoms, violence fills the void. I pray other nations find paths to renewal without bloodshed, but history's lessons are not optimistic.