The historical context of freedom of speech is an extremely interesting one. Why is it that the concept of free speech has been an undying one and has span the history of human communication. Breaking free speech in to three traditional rationals makes the concept easier to understand and definitely makes sense. These three modes of freedom of speech are philosophical, political and individual. They are easy to distinct from one another and function in completely different ways.
From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supposed to grow?
Freedom of speech form a political standpoint is a whole different monster, as it is really only a concept in a geographical area that supports a democratic form of government. So in the United States, this is an important concept, but in other countries around the world, that might not be the case. In our case, it is freedom of speech that allows us to hold our government accountable. Free speech allows people to hold open conversation or forum over issues in the United States. If we have political figures in place that we do not like or do not agree with, it is in our power to speak up. I think we are seeing a great example of this taking place currently, with Donald Trump taking the presidency a year ago.
What if we weren't allowed to speak freely though? What if we were punished for saying negative things about our government or our president. Could you imagine how many people in the United States would be in a sticky situation if people were punished for saying negative things about trump? Well, this is concept that is coming to fruition in China. China has actually made a game out of obedience to the state. Meaning that they have gamified their citizenship, essentially meaning that they receive a good score when they say good things about their government and receive a bad score when they say negative things about their government. This is called "sesame credit" and functions in a similar way to a "credit score" here in the United States. But rather than being denied a car because you've been late to pay your bills, you will be denied a car because you said bad things about the government. I don't know about you, but that doesn't seem like the most pleasant society, to me.
Osborne, Samuel. “China Has Made Obedience to the State a Game.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 22 Dec. 2015, www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-has-made-obedience-to-the-state-a-game-a6783841.html.
From a philosophical level, free speech is a device of truth. That if people are able to speak freely and let their ideas compete, "in the long run the truth will prevail" according to Tedford and Herbeck. I find this interesting, because in my mind, this is the most important facet of free speech. I say this, because I find free speech essential for any kind of societal advancements. If people are not allowed to speak their mind and share their ideas, or discredit others ideas, how is a society supposed to grow?
Freedom of speech form a political standpoint is a whole different monster, as it is really only a concept in a geographical area that supports a democratic form of government. So in the United States, this is an important concept, but in other countries around the world, that might not be the case. In our case, it is freedom of speech that allows us to hold our government accountable. Free speech allows people to hold open conversation or forum over issues in the United States. If we have political figures in place that we do not like or do not agree with, it is in our power to speak up. I think we are seeing a great example of this taking place currently, with Donald Trump taking the presidency a year ago.
What if we weren't allowed to speak freely though? What if we were punished for saying negative things about our government or our president. Could you imagine how many people in the United States would be in a sticky situation if people were punished for saying negative things about trump? Well, this is concept that is coming to fruition in China. China has actually made a game out of obedience to the state. Meaning that they have gamified their citizenship, essentially meaning that they receive a good score when they say good things about their government and receive a bad score when they say negative things about their government. This is called "sesame credit" and functions in a similar way to a "credit score" here in the United States. But rather than being denied a car because you've been late to pay your bills, you will be denied a car because you said bad things about the government. I don't know about you, but that doesn't seem like the most pleasant society, to me.
Osborne, Samuel. “China Has Made Obedience to the State a Game.” The Independent, Independent Digital News and Media, 22 Dec. 2015, www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/china-has-made-obedience-to-the-state-a-game-a6783841.html.
The idea of gamifying citizenship is an interesting one because I feel like there are instances in the United States where we see something along those lines happening. I think of Colin Kaepernick and how he hasn't been able to get job in the NFL for the words he's spoken. Another instance is with Kathy Griffin and while there is no definitive word that her career has been effected by her feud with Trump, it definitely hurt her image. While it isn't as extreme I think it's important to note that our speech against the government in the US isn't always the safest thing.
ReplyDelete