Trump, Social Media and Free Speech
Following the riots at the United State Capitol on January 6, President Trump has been permanently banned from multiple social media platforms including Facebook, Twitter and Snapchat. To many this will seem justified -- but love him or hate, this is not about him. The ability of social media providers to censor, deplatform and silence and act as arbiters of free speech signals the growing decay of a culture of liberty. While there is no doubt that words have meaning and speech can be dangerous, giving way to censorship and de-platforming as solutions to that very speech are equally dangerous, not to mention reckless, and have no place in a free society.
*Disclaimer: This post is not an endorsement of any particular political party or ideological view. It is merely an examination of an important pillar of a free and liberal society, that has an enduring value on our lives.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why Should Freedom of Speech Be Defended?
To answer this question, we should look to Chapter 2 of John Stuart Mill’s essay On Liberty. He has three main arguments as explained by Richard V. Reeves (Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution) and Jonathan Haidt (Social Psychologist and Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University Stern School of Business).
Argument 1
Mill: “If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth; if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth produced by its collision with error.”
Explanation: “The other person’s idea, however, controversial it seems today, might turn out to be right.”
Argument 2
Mill: “Whatever people believe, on subjects on which it is of the first importance to believe rightly, they ought to be able to defend against at least the common objections.”
“He who knows only his own side of the case, knows little of that.”
Explanation: “Even if our opinion is largely correct, we hold it more rationally and securely as a result of being challenged.”
Argument 3
Mill: “When the conflicting doctrine, instead of being one true and the other false, share the truth between them; and the non-conforming opinion is needed to supply the remainder of the truth...”
Explanation: “Opposing views may each contain a portion of the truth, which need to be combined.”
In conclusion, we must be humble enough about our beliefs to let others reach the truth about the world on their own volition. Free speech enables us to do this, transparently, freely and openly.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sure, private companies have the right to kick off anyone from their platform, but a nation of liberty does not exist outside a culture of liberty. We need both. If a growing number of people become disconcerted with others engaging in legally protected speech, the culture of tolerance and respect for others’ freedoms is lost on us.
As progressive journalist Glenn Greenwald writes…
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If arguably the most powerful man in the world can be censored, this poses considerable risk to the perception of liberty and what it constitutes for the general population. We should fear concentrations of power wherever they may occur whether that be in government or corporations. Do we truly want to gamble our liberties on the good faith assumption that censors have our best interests at heart? If we move just one inch into the direction of censorship, we create the precedent for much sinister acts.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Our liberties allow us to live fulfilling, authentic lives, but our liberties are also fragile and require us to vigilantly protect them for posterity. Heed the words of Boyd K. Packer when he says “our whole social order could self-destruct over the obsession with freedom disconnected from responsibility; where choice is imagined to be somehow independent of consequences.”
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Citizens living under despots and demagogues yearn for the ability to think and express their convictions without fear of retribution. We must realize that and be thankful that we are afforded a prized gift and an immense privilege that so many are not. It is, without a doubt, the responsibility of free people everywhere to fiercely defend, cherish and maintain this freedom for others to one day enjoy too.
