The First Amendment to the United States Constitution states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
The rights guaranteed in the Amendment were selected first among the ten amendments in the Bill of Rights because of their importance to the well-being of the new nation. And free speech was the second of those freedoms to be listed.
John Milton, English poet and intellectual of the 1600s, understood the importance of the concept of free speech to individual and national freedom. He wrote, “Let truth and falsehood grapple … in a free and open encounter.”
Under Milton’s sensible vision the American people must get information from a variety of sources to help them understand issues and craft informed opinions. This includes both speech that is liked and accepted by some individuals and groups, and speech which is not liked or accepted by some individuals and groups.
This idea is one of the most important in the founding of the United States of America, and one which has played a critical role in its success among the nations of the world throughout its history.
The rub comes when some people dislike certain points of view, and will not tolerate their existence in free discussion. Milton’s point, however, is that all points of view must be available for those interested in knowing them.
In 1927, Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis provided this advice: "The remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."
In 1969 the U.S. Supreme Court held in Brandenburg v. Ohio that “inflammatory speech -- and even speech advocating violence by members of the Ku Klux Klan -- is protected under the First Amendment, unless the speech ‘is directed to inciting or producing imminent lawless action and is likely to incite or produce such action.’"
Only the most severe and dangerous ideas should be overruled, which means not merely ideas that are disagreed with or that anger some people, but those which actually try to incite violence or endanger people.
Yet many Americans work hard to thwart free speech. Worst of all is if and when the government tries to stifle dissent or controversial language, or participates with non-governmental entities to oppose some speech.
On social media platforms, claiming posts and comments are “misinformation” or “disinformation,” these targeted offerings are deleted, and the writer often blocked from further participation.
Author Salman Rushdie offered this opinion: “The moment you declare a set of ideas to be immune from criticism, satire, derision, or contempt, freedom of thought becomes impossible.” Rushdie was recently the victim of a vicious attack by an armed man, who may have been prompted by Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses,” and wanted vengeance for a message with which he disagreed.
In the campaign for the 2020 election, some posts and comments were labeled as false by these platforms, and removed. After the election, however, some turned out to be correct. But because ideas that should have been freely available were censored, participants were denied knowing this pertinent information.
Imagine a world where only some information is allowed. Who gets to decide what is and is not allowed for anyone to see? Who has that power? Who has that right?
Some prefer to advance their narrow ideas without the troublesome problem of having to prove those ideas are the best through open and free debate. After all, who does not understand that with only one idea being offered, it will be accepted by many people who might not have accepted it had contrary ideas been available to consider.
In addition to social media platforms, other places where different ideas should be open to discussion, such as opinion sections of the news media and schools, must be bastions of the free exchange of ideas.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) recently released the results from its 2022-2023 College Free Speech Rankings survey. This survey questioned 44,847 college students currently enrolled in four-year degree programs at 208 colleges and universities in the United States about their institution’s degree of speech freedom.
The highest score on a 100-point scale was 77.92, ranking it in the “Good” level of speech freedom. Depending upon which grading scale you apply to 77.92, it is only a C-plus, at best.
Five other institutions also were rated “Good.” Sixteen institutions were rated “Poor,” two were rated “Very Poor,” and one was rated “Abysmal,” with a numerical score of 9.91. Only 76 of the 208 institutions in this survey scored above 50.0, only 27 scored above 60.0, and just 6 scored above 70.00.
This is far below the level of free speech and open debate of ideas that should be occurring in institutions of higher education in the United States.
An objective view of the free speech environment will clearly show many efforts to discourage and even ban ideas that some people or some groups do not like.
This is not healthy for our country, and it clearly violates the intent of the First Amendment.
No comments:
Post a Comment