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, which 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.

A small note: This is mostly a thought experiment on my part, so I am not going to go out of my way to provide many examples to back my points, as proper journalism would typically call for.

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 right 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 it makes sense in practice. People who receive pushback on their ideals feel like their assumed rights are being attacked.

The moment something empirical gets treated like a belief, it is protected by cultural norms. It doesn’t matter how wrong it is anymore, and the argument and logical debate come to an end. While I think a certain level of respect for people is an important foundation of civil society, I would argue that to respect someone’s right to be empirically wrong borders on madness. There is a fine line here, though, from the opposite angle.

There is a risk that if a society over-corrects this ideology, it creates its own laundry list of problems, including but not limited to narrow-mindedness and an inflexible assignment of truth. There is only a very narrow sweet spot, I think, where we both respect people’s beliefs and allow accommodation of varied ways of thinking.

It is almost a psychological paradox that, to be optimal, one might have to be able to accept people and their beliefs for what they are while also recognizing that they are wrong. But that is the way I see it. It is a unque & common logical falicy.

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 it, who end up more extreme and less likely to normalize back into society with more sensible ideals.

I would like to state for the record that this is not the only thing that pulls people toward the toxic cycles of loneliness. I don’t even think it is one of the larger ones, but it is worth looking at. It is a huge, multifaceted problem that needs many multifaceted solutions. So then I ask: how do we tip the scales away from this?

Solutions?

I would like to try to answer this question three times: how can we, as a society, help fix this? In other words, what social policies could we enact within society? How could we modify social norms? How can we, as individuals, fix this if it is happening in ourselves? And finally, how can we help our friends and loved ones from sinking into this?

Social norms

WIP

Individual acts

WIP

Friends or maybe even enemies

WIP

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