You can't say that!

Why not?

I have always been fairly intrigued by the topic of freedom of speech. It appears to be such a simple logic. That in this world, people should have the right to speak their minds. A famous quote by Evelyn Hall, summarizing the thoughts of Voltaire, that while 'I disapprove of what you say, I will defend to the death your right to say it'. It seems pretty clear cut doesn't it?

But on the other hand, it can be such a dangerous route to go down. Because once you agree that freedom of speech is crucial and of the utmost importance, then we are opening the floodgates to having to defend the indefensible. As Gaiman said, you are going to have to 'defend the right of people to read, or to write or to say, what you don't say, or like, or want said.'

I find it's this double edged that people often find it hard to reconcile with. But is it really as simple as knowing how to balance the scale between freedom of speech, and human sensibility? We should all be allowed to speak freely, but with that power also comes a certain level of responsibility (As spiderman said, right? Haha.) Knowing your limits and utilising the very important skill of tact is often overlooked once people step up on their soapbox. It's much easier said than done, of course. I mean it seems as though to me, the whole idea of freedom of speech started to gain momentum as people seeked to voice their discontent, their arguments, their views on sensitive topics like race, gender and religion. As emotions fire their need to speak out, sensibility often flies out the window.

So what then? An interesting take could be that if you can't stop people from saying what they want, if you have to defend their right to say it, then perhaps it would do us all good, as listeners, to learn how to distinguish between what is true or false, between fact and opinion. After all, freedom of speech gives them the right to speak their minds, but it doesn't give them the right to have others listen. So if you know well and good, that someone is spouting hate about a particular topic, instead of giving him the attention that he so desires, tune him out. It might anger us, it might offend and insult but as the party that is being attacked, if we know that there is no basis for his allegations, then letting go and ignoring it should be as easy as water sliding down our backs. Should be, being the key phrase here. Haha.

I guess at the end of the day, it is difficult to balance the scale between freedom of speech and the extent of censorship. How much leeway should we give, what are the consequences of allowing emotional and potentially damaging messages to be broadcasted across society? Do we trust our people to have the ability to differentiate between truth and false truth?

No real conclusion as of yet, but a good measure? Don't take everything that we read or hear as truth, learn the art of salt pinching (heh.), learn to question our sources, learn to form our own opinions. We could all do with a little less ignorance, and a lot more of critical thinking.

Freedom of speech, in swedish is 'Yttrandefrihet'. Swedes seem to like joining their words together :)