In a previous blog post I wrote a concise but complete definition of what I understand the concept of freedom of speech, the right to free speech, to be, in a short and concise format that's handy to refer to. This definition consisted of four rules. In these subsequent posts I'm going to delve deeper into each rule. This post is about rule 3, which said:
You should not be forced to say anything you don't want to say (ie. compelled speech). You should not be forced to listen to any opinions you don't want to listen to. This second part only applies as long as it does not infringe on any of the other rules.
This principle could be summarized as "freedom of speech also includes freedom from speech".
The very word "freedom" means having the right to make your own choices freely, without compulsion, coercion and intimidation (eg. with the threat of punishment). Thus "freedom of speech" does not only mean that you can freely express your opinion in a public forum, but also that you don't have to say things you don't want to say, and you are free to make that choice without punishment or repercussions. (This is another aspect of the concept of free speech that many people forget, or even are unaware of.)
Compelled speech is fundamentally against the principle of free speech. Most cultures have customs, social norms and rules of good behavior and etiquette, and generally people who blatantly and egregiously refuse to follow these rules tend to be considered rude, unpleasant and unlikeable, but such breaches of decorum and good manners and respect should not result in actual punishment and severe negative consequences (such as severe financial harm, or physical violence). People can freely stop interacting with people who they consider rude and unlikeable, but they shouldn't actively seek for those people to be punished in some manner.
A counterpart of this is the rule that nobody should be forced to listen to opinions and speech that they don't want to listen to.
However, as mentioned in the rule itself, this part ought to be applied only within reason, and only if applying it does not infringe on any of the other rules. For example, someone's expression of free speech in a public forum must not be stopped merely because someone in the audience does not want to hear it and is for one reason or another unable to leave that location. (That person, rather obviously, must not be actively stopped from leaving if he or she wants to and there's no rational reason to do so. However, just because the person is unable or unwilling to leave is not reason enough to stop the expression of free speech going on.)
Comments
Post a Comment