Free Speech: The Acid Test

Story Info
Is it democratic? Free Speech gives the answer.
792 words
4.67
20.7k
1
Story does not have any tags

Part 2 of the 2 part series

Updated 08/30/2017
Created 05/17/2005
Share this Story

Font Size

Default Font Size

Font Spacing

Default Font Spacing

Font Face

Default Font Face

Reading Theme

Default Theme (White)
You need to Log In or Sign Up to have your customization saved in your Literotica profile.
PUBLIC BETA

Note: You can change font size, font face, and turn on dark mode by clicking the "A" icon tab in the Story Info Box.

You can temporarily switch back to a Classic Literotica® experience during our ongoing public Beta testing. Please consider leaving feedback on issues you experience or suggest improvements.

Click here
oggbashan
oggbashan
1,521 Followers

Copyright Oggbashan May 2005

The author asserts the moral right to be identified as the author of this work.

If you are a member of an organisation, can you:

A. Call the Chairman of the Board a stupid prat?

B. Suggest that the General Manager is incompetent and a wanker?

C. Describe the employees as talentless pricks who could be outperformed by three-toed sloths?

Could you make such statements live to a TV camera? You might change your mind and describe them ten minutes later as respectively inspired, the greatest thing since sliced bread, and as living gods – but you can safely say any of those things - if you are a member of a UK amateur football club.

In other organisations such freedom of expression might be unwise.

Free speech is the acid test of the strength and democracy of an organisation.

If you work for a company, does that company have a suggestion box? Could you put defamatory statements about your managers into that box and still remain an employee? If you can, you are working for a good employer.

If you belong to a club, can you criticise the management committee and still remain a member? If you can't, your club is undemocratic. If you can, you might end up on the committee helping to correct what you have criticised. There are responsibilities with free speech. It is easy to retort 'If you think you can do better, come and try'. Perhaps you can.

If a government allows free speech, which includes an uncensored media, then it should be regarded as a legitimate government, no matter what form it takes.

The freedom to openly criticise the government or your bosses is a powerful weapon that has cost lives to retain and is still costing lives to obtain. That freedom has led recently to changes of government in Eastern Europe when the people took to the streets to protest about unfair and illegal actions by their rulers.

The USSR's tanks eventually crushed the 1956 Prague Spring in Hungary. At that time, had the USSR been vulnerable to free speech then the Hungarian revolution would have happened a generation before Hungary actually became a free country able to choose democracy.

The introduction of Perestroika in the USSR which allowed people to question the actions of their government was the first major step on the route to the break-up of the USSR into separate countries feeling their way gradually to the democratic freedoms common in Western Europe.

Freedom of speech was so powerful that the East Germans had to build the Berlin Wall, not to keep invaders out, but to keep their own citizens in. President Kennedy's 'Ich bin ein Berliner' speech frightened the East German authorities into oppressing their citizens more than they already had.

Even some dictators have felt it necessary to allow the appearance of free speech even if they cannot allow the reality. Opposition to the government in newspapers in some African states is officially permitted. It is punished by deniable raids on the printing works, the editorial offices, beatings and even killings of reporters by so-called criminal gangs that everyone knows are supported by the government. When those in power can hold up their hands in apparent horror and claim that attacks on free media are nothing to do with them, then they can still claim legitimacy even if their power depends on the AK47 and the machete to silence their critics.

The success of free speech is not that of a few individuals, although like Charter 77 a few can start the process, but by mobilising large numbers of the population to challenge and criticise the legitimacy of the government. The fear of the international media and the response from the rest of the world has an impact far beyond the country's borders. The massacre of students demonstrating in Peking is less likely now than it was then. It is almost impossible to stop pictures and videos of an event from being posted on the Internet in graphic detail contradicting official accounts of 'a few dissidents' or 'a few fundamentalist Muslim terrorists' attacking the country's institutions.

If the country's leaders are impervious to the complaints of their citizens, the countries that back those leaders, or work with those leaders, are not immune to the effects of free speech. The days when Western Democracies could unreservedly back dictators that oppress their people are ending. Free speech and a free media are making such policies unpopular and ultimately barred to any government that seeks re-election.

Free speech is the tool that extends freedom to the places where other freedoms cannot yet reach. It is still the acid test to show whether a people are really free.

oggbashan
oggbashan
1,521 Followers
Please rate this story
The author would appreciate your feedback.
  • COMMENTS
Anonymous
Our Comments Policy is available in the Lit FAQ
Post as:
Anonymous
6 Comments
Lector77Lector77almost 4 years ago
Yes, but...

First, a nit: "The USSR's tanks eventually crushed the 1956 Prague Spring in Hungary." Well, not quite. The Prague Spring came about a dozen years later, in a different country. The response of the USSR was similar.

That little detail attended to, you are obviously correct in your sentiments, but the influence of money in the so-called democratic Western nations has put some distance between free speech and its traditional benefits. Between Bloviating Boris and the trumpenproletareit©, the U.K. and the U.S. grow less democratic and less free by the day. For free speech to protect us from corruption in government, we need an electorate competant to read and listen critically.

It would be interesting to see an update to this good essay.

legerdemerlegerdemeralmost 9 years ago
Well said

...and always important sentiments. The difference free speech makes is immeasurable. I wonder about the difference between the US and the UK with respect to what is considered libel. That throws some cold water on free speech rights. What do you think?

talldarkfellowtalldarkfellowover 10 years ago
Business versus Government.

In a nation with basic legal protections of free speech you can theoretically criticize government policies and officials to your heart's content.

Unless you are a slave or indentured servant, you can freely choose to seek or leave employment with a business and that company can hire or fire you just as freely. If the company's managers or owners don't like something you've said, they can't shoot you or lock you in the basement for years (at least not without opening themselves up to arrest and prosecution), but they can certainly fire your posterior. They can't prevent you from speaking, but they don't have to subsidize your speech by paying your salary.

Most people don't seem to appreciate this not-so-fine distinction.

AnonymousAnonymousalmost 19 years ago
Interesting, but<YAWN>...

I think I saw a documentary on PBS or NPR that was as inspired. The facts are true, but not exciting or emotional to the average reader. Amnesty International is a good source. Good luck in the contest.

sacksackalmost 19 years ago
makes good sense...

good luck in the contest!

Show More
Share this Story

READ MORE OF THIS SERIES

Similar Stories

Her Roommate Returns! - FTDS Conclusion of Odiouser’s Story - "Dave Traps The Cheaters".in Loving Wives
The Chasm and the Bridge Ch. 01 A story about the importance of sacrifice in a marriage.in Loving Wives
It Sucks To Be Me: Marc's Story Can a leopard really change his spots?in Loving Wives
Somewhere Between Heaven and Hell The cost of cheating is too high.in Loving Wives
Pie Thief Boy meets girl. Sometimes it isn't complicated.in Romance
More Stories