Not the Civil Right

---

Freedom of speech is a keystone of Western governing practice, but that is not the specific topic of this article. It is interesting on its own, sure, but in this small post I am much more interested in the common misconception around it, and the consequences of that misconception that influence a lot of how the world works.

Most lawyers will tell you, if you ask, that freedom of speech only applies to the government. In its purest form, that civil right only prevents the government from interfering with how one talks. No other body is governed by this principle. So if a person faces repercussions for what he says, and the actor is not the government, it is not a protected act under freedom of speech. And yet… in practice, it kind of is.

The extrapolation of what is deserved

My claim is that despite the pedantry of law, most people are taken by an assumption of knowledge. Most people assume this extends to all speech. I believe that assumption has cascading effects that trickle down into societal expectations for not just the government, but each other.

Most polite society operates on this assumption, and it almost feels not only rude to object, but rude when people object to one’s own claims. Even excluding the general logical fallacies that inhibit proper empirical debate and discourse, this failure to separate legal protection from social consequence distorts how people argue.

While current events, cancel culture, and a swing toward more authoritarian ideals have eroded this assumption, it still stands as a core support of people’s ideology. Ironically, it is often the most fascist and extreme amongst us who champion their right to speak their mind in the most extreme ways. This feels antithetical, but makes sense in practice. People who receive pushback on their ideals feel like their assumed rights are being attacked.

A social concern of mine

While this has a butterfly effect across many societal spaces, I want to make one claim: this creates a huge incentive for people to cater to those who feel unheard. While they may all hold variations of extreme opinions, a speaker simply has to make them feel heard to gain favor. This is deeply concerning to me, as it is highly exploitable socially and can amass the benefits of an extremely toxic form of popularity. A lot of people do this and I could name a lot of them but I am more concerned with the people exploited by this who end up more extreme and less likely to normalize back into society with more sensable ideals.

WIP

This article is a work in progress of mine I do all this writing as a hobby. Come back later!