Where does freedom of speech end?
Liberty isn’t boundless. Not even in free societies. We all know that. But what are these boundaries? Where should freedom end in a free society? The simple rule: Where the liberty of others is interfered.
But that is where simplicity ends.
Because not every interference should be sanctioned. You are allowed to drive on a busy road even if this interferes with any other drivers. It‘s you that makes them take longer to their destination. It‘s still allowed. Of course, it is. Living in a society does not only mean benefitting from each other, it can also be competitive. We all contest for scarce resources. That‘s nature. Economics is all about that.
So, competition (and therefore partial deprivations of liberties) is ok.
If two conditions are met.
Firstly, the competition must be based on the same bedrock (everyone is allowed to take the road), and secondly, nobody gets hurt within that competition (you are committed to traffic regulations even if it takes you longer to arrive home).
These „limitations“ of liberty are the same regarding speech. But it is incredibly challenging with free speech. Because you often can‘t see the violations.
A current example. A few days ago, the presidents of Harvard, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Pennsylvania had to testify before a House committee in the USA about the state of antisemitism on their campuses. It did not go well for them. They were struggling with balancing respect for free expression on campus with opposition to hate speech. As a result, they probably will lose their job.
Maybe they haven‘t seen where free speech crosses non-acceptable hate speech. Perhaps they couldn‘t. Because, and this is the point of this little post:
There is no clear answer to where free speech ends and hate speech starts.
Society brokers the boundaries again and again. They are redrawn steadily. We must tolerate people saying things we don‘t like to hear. But limits vary. How much sympathy for the fight of Palestinians can we take in light of the slaughter on October 07 and the jeering of that slaughter from parts of the Palestinian society (and not only by Palestinians)? What if someone says that the fight for Palestinians will only end when Israel as a country is wiped out? At what point was the line crossed into hate speech? And what should happen then? How should it be sanctioned?
These questions are so hard to answer. At least that can be said: It touches the boundaries of the free society.
Though speech is all we have to bring forward arguments in a discussion. All we have for exchange. And without exchange, we lose all hope for rapprochement. Without it, things get even worse.
✊,
Johannes Eber