I don't understand the language of the feedback on your trust page but it seems both you and others are not using the trust system properly.
I just noticed this thread for some reason, though it's a couple months old. I took a look at OP's feedback, and I have to say I agree with you there. Negative/positive trust shouldn't be used for disagreements about politics, and I'd say not even a neutral is appropriate. Hhampuz left a neg for OP, and I find that disheartening as I have a lot of respect for him. Still do, but I would have thought he would have known better than to give OP a neg because of politics.
as the forum allows freedom of speech 100%
What if I told you that the people of your countries are not human and they can and should be exterminated? What if I told you that your countries are havens of fascism and should be wiped off the face of the earth? And I will spread all of these sayings around the world, including on this forum, supporting my words with lies, fakes, etc. How's that for "freedom of speech"?
All of those things would be the consequence of free speech, whether you agree with them or not. Free speech (in the purist sense of the term) means the freedom to tell lies. It doesn't guarantee those lies will be free from consequences, because the propaganda you mentioned would--and should--be met with opposition, which also depends on a lack of censorship.
I know this is a sensitive topic in the context of the Russia/Ukraine situation, but remember that it's the speech you don't like or want to hear that needs to be protected. If that wasn't the case, who would be the gatekeeper of "truth" and would you trust that person or entity?