There is currently much talk about the right to and the defense of freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is of course important and should be nurtured, encouraged and supported for all. But, before defending the rights to free speech, should we first investigate whether our words are actually free at all?
We are all influenced by our environments in numerous ways. Pushed by culture and nudged through our learning and experiences. The desires of parents are trained and carried through children while advertising and media suggest and develop everything from body issues to racism, radicalisation to oppression. Some are blatant forces that do little to hide, whereas others are subtle, carefully concealed and fly under the conscious radar, guiding our thoughts and actions without us ever having the chance to catch them for review.
These ideas and movements direct us towards forming groups that think like us, act like us and thereby make us feel safe within their ranks. Forming groups from a physical survival standpoint works wonders. However, when membership of the group demands same or similar thinking and action, it often stifles creativity, self-development and depth of the individual. Calls to ‘be yourself’ and ‘think differently’ are negated by punishment when ‘yourself’ or ‘your ideas’ are not close enough to the group average. Due to this, a lack of diversity in thinking quickly develops and ideas that do not challenge the status quo gather the bulk of the support.
Freedom of speech is the right to speak without censorship or restraint by the government although each government does put restraints on this with laws that cover such things as inciting violence or promoting illegal drug usage. But, even if the government allows free speech, does that automatically mean that our speech is free? If membership in a group is dependent on the group accepting the speech, and membership of the group is seen as an important part of personal survival, then self-censorship takes place due to the pressure of potential lost membership or negative social consequences such as job loss, community ridicule or even violence.
This means then that although we may be free by right to speak as we please, we are limited in numerous ways such as group pressure, fear of loss or criticism as well as the emotions that are created alongside such as anger, disappointment and guilt. This would then mean that our speech is not truly free at all and actually directed by the position of the groups with which we identify or are against. And these groups and ideals with which we identify are not even consciously chosen by us in the first place so, how much freedom do we actually have in the words that we speak?
Some people may use this as justification to distance themselves from the responsibility of their words but this does nothing for freedom of speech itself. To speak freely requires no fear and to be fearless requires unattachment from all else. No group, no preference, no culture, no nationality, no religion, no ego. No attachment of any kind.
Everyone can have the right to free speech but how many can actually speak freely.