Tag: Freedom of Speech

Free Speech

Enjoy Your Free Speech

Posted on | by Sadie Aldaya | Leave a Comment on Enjoy Your Free Speech

By Amy Jones

“Enjoy Your Free Speech.”

—Mike Johnson

Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives

In December of 1860, Frederick Douglas was slated to lead a discussion on the abolition of slavery for a Boston audience of fellow abolitionists. An angry mob opposing abolition took over the stage and shouted down the discussion. Six days later, in a gathering at Boston’s Music Hall, Douglass ended his lecture with a brief address criticizing how the earlier event was handled—by the protestors, Boston’s mayor, and even supporters of Douglass who expressed reluctance to criticize the mob’s clear violation of free speech. Douglass described the earlier meeting as having been “captured by a mob of gentlemen and dispersed by the order of the mayor, who refused to protect it…”1

Douglass went on to note the irony. These men who shouted him down were not rowdy, uneducated drunkards but “men who pride themselves upon their respect for law and order.” But as gentlemen proclaimed their “law of slavery,” he noted, the “law of free speech . . . [was] trampled under foot . . .” Douglass described this incident as “instructive.”2

How so? What can we, the citizens of the same nation, learn from this seemingly minor historical event, which happened 164 years ago? Surely, we have grown to understand and appreciate our right to freedom of speech.

Enjoy Your Free Speech

Maybe not. On April 25, 2024, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Mike Johnson, addressed the students and faculty at Columbia University, an institution he defines as “one of  America’s preeminent academic institutions.”3 The purpose of his speech was to condemn the violent pro-Palestinian protests that had exploded on campus and to call for the resignation of Columbia’s president, Minouche Shafik, for her failure to protect freedom of speech on Columbia’s campus and enforce school policies protecting all students.

The same students, who had sought to silence and intimidate Jewish and pro-Israel students on campus, jeered and shouted, “We can’t hear you,” attempting to end Johnson’s speech just as the mob of gentlemen attempted to shout down Douglass. Undaunted, Johnson responded, “Enjoy your free speech,” and, in a similar spirit to that of Douglass, continued his address.4

Three Lessons From Douglas on Free Speech

These two incidents of lawless attacks on freedom of speech are startlingly similar regarding both the words and actions involved and the supposedly enlightened, privileged status of the perpetrators. It seems, after all, we should revisit the instructive lessons from our past. In Douglass’ closing comments at the Music Hall, he outlined three lessons he drew from his experience of having that freedom attacked.

  • Every person, regardless of race, gender, social, economic, or educational status, has the same right to speak. No one is to be excluded. The freedom of speech is the common right of all men. Douglass stated, “No right was deemed by the fathers of the Government more sacred than the right of speech. It was in their eyes, as in the eyes of all thoughtful men, the great moral renovator of society and government.”5
  • It is the responsibility of governmental and institutional authorities to lawfully uphold, protect, and defend all citizens’ freedom to speak. The equal enforcement of the law is critical. After chastising Boston’s mayor for capitulating to the angry mob, Douglass emphasized, “There can be no right of speech where any man, however, lifted up, or however humble, however young, or however old, is overawed by force, and compelled to suppress his honest sentiments.”6
  • Freedom of speech provides opportunities to hear as well as to speak. Douglass wisely understood that it is as important to hear other people express their ideas freely as it is for us to freely speak our own. Our right to freedom of speech offers us a double blessing. Douglass concluded his speech with this reflection: “To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker. It is just as criminal to rob a man of his right to speak and hear as it would be to rob him of his money.”7

Each of Douglass’s assertions have not only been confirmed and defended throughout America’s history, but policies protecting freedom of speech have been confirmed in liberal intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations and non-governmental organizations, such as Amnesty International.

A Universal Right That’s Not So Universal

The United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights was to set “a common standard of achievements for all peoples and all nations . . . fundamental human rights to be universally protected…”8 Article 19, in particular, addresses freedom of speech and states that the individual must have the right to freely express their opinions and ideas “without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.”9 Amnesty International, an independent, international, non-governmental organization, states that its mission includes the commitment to help fight abuses of human rights worldwide and to free people jailed just for voicing their opinion.

Both international organizations support freedom of speech for all people echoing America’s First Amendment right which was ratified in 1791. The First Amendment was written well before both the writing of United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948 and the founding of Amnesty International in 1961 emphasizing America’s earlier declaration of our sacred right to freedom of speech.

The importance of Douglass’s second point that it is the responsibility of governmental and institutional authorities to lawfully defend a citizen’s freedom to speak has been exemplified by the widespread suppression of speech affirming conservative values, or in Columbia’s case, pro-Israel values in university classrooms and on campuses across the country in recent months. The failure of university administrators to defend this freedom and the rationalizations used to justify their actions is symptomatic of our country’s breakdown in protecting its citizens. This type of institutional cowardice and negligence has become blatantly obvious.

Douglass’ own response to this type of negligence was to strongly urge his Boston audience that “…the time to assert a right is the time when the right itself is called in question, and that the men of all others to assert it are the men to whom the right has been denied.”10

If We Are Brave, We’ll Win the Fight

Free speech requires a courageous defense not only from citizens but, most importantly, from the institutions responsible for upholding this freedom through equal application of the law, even in the face of threats and opposition. In an address to his organization, American Cornerstone Institute, Dr. Ben Carson states, “…if we are persistent…if we are courageous, if we are brave, we’ll win that fight.”11— the fight to avoid America’s movement toward being a totalitarian state where free speech is unsupported, or worse, opposed by law.  

Douglass’s third point that freedom of speech provides opportunities for a citizen to hear as well as to speak, was articulated earlier in 1859 in the famous treatise, On Liberty, by the 19th-century English philosopher John Stuart Mill. He makes this point incisively.

“The peculiar evil of silencing the expression of opinion is, that it is robbing the human race; posterity as well as the existing generation; those who dissent from the opinion, still more than those who hold it. If the opinion is right, they are deprived of the opportunity of exchanging error for truth: if wrong, they lose, what is almost as great a benefit, the clearer perception and livelier impression of truth, produced by its collision with error. “12

This doctrine has come to be defined as the doctrine of counterspeech—”…is one of the most important free-expression principles in First Amendment jurisprudence.”13 It derives from the theory that audiences, or recipients of the expression, can weigh for themselves the values of competing ideas and, hopefully, follow the better approach.”14

Freedom of Speech Only Matters When You Don’t Like What Someone Has to Say

The danger of silencing speech has also been tested in our Supreme Court system. In the case of Whitney v. California (1927), Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis’s concurring opinion advanced the protection of the freedom of speech and has become a “…critical justifications for safeguarding freedom of speech even under the most challenging conditions.”15 He wrote: “If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.”16

The closing instructive comments by Douglass in December 1860 are as applicable today as they were 164 years ago. Our fight to protect and defend our freedom of speech for every citizen in our nation is crucial.

Douglass concluded his final remarks with the statement, “The principle [freedom of speech] must rest upon its own proper basis. And until the right is accorded to the humblest as freely as to the most exalted citizen, the government of Boston [and the United States of America] is but an empty name, and its freedom a mockery.

A man’s right to speak does not depend upon where he was born or upon his color. The simple quality of manhood is the solid basis of the right—and there let it rest forever.”17

Enjoy your free speech.

Amy Jones is an Instructional Designer for  Classical Conversations®. She and her husband of 36 years raised four children in the beautiful foothills of the Tennessee Appalachian Mountains. Amy and Whit thoroughly enjoyed homeschooling their children through high school. During this journey, the Jones’ were blessed to participate in a  Classical Conversations® community, even tutoring and directing several programs. Now blessed with nine grandchildren, Amy enjoys writing  Classical Conversations® materials for young learners in the Scribblers tier.

  1. Douglass, Frederick. “A Plea for Free Speech in Boston (1860).” National Constitution Center – Constitutioncenter.Org, 2024, constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/frederick-douglass-a-plea-for-free-speech-in-boston-1860. ↩︎
  2. Douglass, Frederick. ↩︎
  3. Allen, Hugh. “Mike Johnson Columbia Palestine Protest.” Rev, 2024, www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-johnson-speaks-at-columbia-university ↩︎
  4. Allen, Hugh. “Mike Johnson Columbia Palestine Protest.” Rev, 2024, www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/mike-johnson-speaks-at-columbia-university ↩︎
  5. Douglass, Frederick. “A Plea for Free Speech in Boston (1860).” National Constitution Center – Constitutioncenter.Org, 2024, constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/frederick-douglass-a-plea-for-free-speech-in-boston-1860 ↩︎
  6. Douglass, Frederick. ↩︎
  7. Douglass, Frederick. ↩︎
  8. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. United Nations, United Nations, www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights#:~:text=Article%2019,media%20and%20regardless%20of%20frontiers. Accessed 12 Aug. 2024. ↩︎
  9. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. ↩︎
  10. Douglass, Frederick. “A Plea for Free Speech in Boston (1860).” National Constitution Center – Constitutioncenter.Org, 2024, constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/frederick-douglass-a-plea-for-free-speech-in-boston-1860. ↩︎
  11. Carson, Ben. “Dr. Ben Carson’s Most Important Speech.” Rick Walker Podcast, YouTube, 2023, www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h1Tj-Q6MxU&t=818s. ↩︎
  12. Mill, John Stuart. “John Stuart Mill.” Oxford Reference, 2024, www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780191843730.001.0001/q-oro-ed5-00007298. ↩︎
  13. “Counterspeech Doctrine Archives.” The Free Speech Center, firstamendment.mtsu.edu/encyclopedia/case/counterspeech-doctrine/#:~:text=The%20counterspeech%20doctrine%20posits%20that,hopefully%2C%20follow%20the%20better%20approach. Accessed 13 Aug. 2024. ↩︎
  14. “Counterspeech Doctrine Archives.” ↩︎
  15. Serafin, Tatiana. “Brandeis Concurring with Holmes in Whitney v. California, 1927.” First Amendment Watch, 30 Sept. 2022, firstamendmentwatch.org/history-speaks-brandeis-concurring-holmes-whitney-v-california-1927/. ↩︎
  16. Serafin, Tatiana. ↩︎
  17. Douglass, Frederick. “A Plea for Free Speech in Boston (1860).” National Constitution Center – Constitutioncenter.Org, 2024, constitutioncenter.org/the-constitution/historic-document-library/detail/frederick-douglass-a-plea-for-free-speech-in-boston-1860. ↩︎
Freedom of Speech

Freedom of Speech: A Unifying Right until Our Perspectives Clash

Posted on | by Jennifer Bright

By Sadie Aldaya

How did we get here?

How did we arrive at the place where freedom of speech is cherished in American culture until someone says something the other doesn’t agree with? How is it that for over 200 years, patriots have fought and died for the right for us to continue to exercise our 1st Amendment right—even if we reveal our ignorance on an issue, say something unpopular, embarrassingly ridiculous, or counter-cultural?

Just as important…can this road be traversed in reverse?

Walk with me, and let’s ponder—Freedom of speech: A unifying right until our perspectives clash.

How Indeed?

How indeed, has the “You’re entitled to your opinion” slogan superseded the right for someone to voice one—are we even entitled to our opinion anymore? Can we turn back the crashing societal waves of mind control and behavioral modification? Can we control our minds and modify our own behavior? So many questions!

Let’s start with…

Evidence of Societal Mind Control and Behavioral Modification

We’ve all been there. It’s on the tip of your tongue, but you don’t dare say it. Perhaps you’ve felt ashamed for even thinking about it! Why? Was it sinful? No. Was it unkind? Not really. Was it true? Yes. Then why wasn’t it said?

Could it be that we didn’t want to encounter the discomfort of being scoffed at, shunned, or silenced?

Exhibit A – Conditioning of the populace through political correctness.

How did we get to the place where we must all be in lockstep when it comes to our opinions, ideas, values, and morals or face the retribution of those around us? Why is tolerance spouted from every organization and every talking head on television, but tolerance isn’t really valued, only strict adherence to the prevailing dogma?

Exhibit B – Conditioning of the population through the philosophy of intersectionality, where one’s opinions are weighted and valued based not on how they stack up against objective truth but on where their labels fall within certain categories.

How, in a free society, can the leader of the free world paint a segment of people with a broad brush, clumping their ideologies together based on their skin color, and call them the “most dangerous terrorist threat”[1] to the nation—and not be reprimanded for it?

Exhibit C – Conditioning of the populace through propaganda of fear and hate.

The phenomenon of “Cancel Culture” cannot escape anybody’s attention. Since when do we allow abuse of power to “shut the people up?” The number of individuals who have been deplatformed and debanked is astounding!

When it first started, I think we were all stunned and paralyzed, wrestling with our cognitive dissonance, much like an onlooker who sees an impending disaster but can’t force themselves to act.

These people’s freedom of speech has been revoked. Whether we like what they say or how they say it doesn’t matter. They have a right to say it, and we have the right to hear it, support it, or denounce it.

Here is a recent list.

  • Alex Jones
  • Milo Yiannopoulos
  • President Donald Trump
  • Andrew Tate
  • Laura Loomer
  • Gavin McInnes
  • Gab and Parler
  • Enrique Tarrio
  • J.K. Rowling
  • Shane Dawson
  • Kevin Hart
  • Gina Carano
  • Chris Pratt
  • …many others

Exhibit D – Cancel Culture, “de-banking” and “de-platforming.”

These individuals have faced various forms of de-platforming, de-banking, or cancellation due to their actions or statements that sparked public outrage and led to significant consequences in their professional lives.

How did We Arrive Here?

Incrementally. Slowly. Unobtrusively. Deceptively.

They played the long game over many decades, and not enough people realized they had an opponent slipping their freedom away as they slumbered—not unlike a cautious parent weaseling an object from the grip of a sleeping child. Those who did awaken and speak up to warn of the siren’s call were gagged, silenced, and choked with the pill of “political correctness.” Others were simply pacified.

Now that decades have gone by and many have awakened, their ideas and vocalization of them are met with eye rolls and perhaps condescending utterances of “Boomers.” Their warnings are not heeded because they are viewed as generational gaps in knowledge and societal evolution.

Pastors didn’t want to make unnecessary waves for the sake of politeness and unity, so the pulpits remained silent. They rationalized and perpetrated a false sense of “love and tolerance,” a love that doesn’t disagree, point out pitfalls, warn, or correct—a love that places acceptance above all else on the altar.

What was sacrificed in its place?

Truth and the ability to say and hear it without being hurt or triggered. Worse yet, some pastors seized this opportunity to overthrow goodness and righteousness to embrace evil. This is how absolute truth was assassinated.

All of this happened for a few reasons.

  • The weakest, most susceptible, and malleable among us were captured first in the indoctrination camps (i.e., government schools) for more than 100 years. These eroded the Christian worldview and pumped out little ideologues for decades (the long game…remember?).
  • Seminaries were infiltrated… for this is where the largest opposition should have been based with fortifications of a strong Christian worldview.
  • Legacy Media was appropriated, for every good war commander knows you must disrupt their supply chain and communications to take over an opponent completely.
  • The nuclear family has eroded to the extent that most adults of child-bearing age are forgoing marriage and having children.
  • Hollywood aided the narrative by pumping out propaganda in story form.
  • National identity has been eroded and supplanted by the desire for globalization.
  • Technocrat capitalists and stakeholder capitalism, of course, played a role.

Where do We Go From Here?

We didn’t get to where we are overnight, and we won’t get out overnight.

Martin Niemöller was a prominent Lutheran pastor in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. At first, he sympathized with Nazi ideas, but after Hitler came to power in 1933, Niemöller became an outspoken critic of Hitler’s interference in the Protestant Church. He spent the last eight years of Nazi rule (1937 to 1945) in prisons and concentration camps.

He is famously quoted for the following:

“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”[2]

Here expressed is Niemöller’s belief that Germans had been complicit through silence amidst Nazi evils (imprisonment, persecution, and murder of millions of people). He felt this was especially true of the leaders of the Protestant churches, which were made up of Lutheran, Reformed, and United traditions.[2]

Note that he stood against what he initially supported when it conflicted with his Christian worldview. Note also his sincere ownership and regret for failing to speak sooner.

How do We Reverse the Traverse?

In sum, we ask:  ‘How do we reverse the traverse?”

1. Stand for truth.

Speak the truth. Don’t tolerate lies and falsehoods. Instead, immunize yourself and your loved ones against the contagion of the culture, recognizing that our

“…weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.”  2 Corinthians 10:4-6

At the same time, we should work within our homes, churches, and communities to rebuild the walls of a Christ-centered worldview that has protected and blessed us for so long.

2. Recognize that we don’t…

“Wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 6:12

Therefore, submerse yourself in prayer and meditation.

3. Be sober about what you spend time viewing, doing, and talking about.

What do you or I spend our time viewing, doing, and talking about? Do we seek truth, beauty, goodness, wisdom, and virtue?

“…Whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.”   Philippians 4:8

All of this takes time and commitment, but it is the only way out. In and of ourselves, we cannot moderate our minds and behavior, nor should we legislate to do so, for it is the place of the Holy Spirit to bring about the manifestations of the fruit of the Spirit. However, it is in our purview to honor the liturgy of the ordinary in our lives, provide time and silence to be “…rooted and built up in Him, and established in the faith…” so that we can…

“Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Hm, who is the head of all principality and power.”  Colossians 2:7-9

Conclusion

How did we get here?

We arrived through the consumption of a steady diet consisting of complacency, self-elevation, pride, and vigilance. This was combined with the cowardice to accept the threats of isolation and cancelation.

Can we reverse it?

Yes. this can be accomplished by identifying issues, opposing worldviews, and speaking against what is wrong and what is right.

In his poem “The Second Coming” (written shortly after WWI), William Yeats states,

“Turning and turning in the widening gyre   
               The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
               Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
               Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
               The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere   
               The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
               The best lack all conviction, while the worst   
               Are full of passionate intensity….”[3]

Yeat’s heart was breaking for what humanity was enduring. He knew that the new worldview would eventually fall apart. Anarchy and bloodshed ensued. The best citizens lacked conviction, and the worst people possessed an intense passion for their ideas and beliefs.

In essence, the falcon could not hear the falconer.

Sound familiar?

It’s clear that Christians need to live a life of repentance, forgiveness, and prayer. Not only should we have a steady diet of the Word, but this must be coupled with discernment and alertness for what passes for culture.

We must recognize that all ideas and philosophies necessitate being captive by Christ.

Without Christ, man’s ideas have consequences. Moreover, these are often severe consequences.

If so, then we should take action.

Sadie Aldaya profile headshot

Sadie Aldaya is the Research & Quality Assurance Specialist for Classical Conversations® Special Projects & Policy Research Department. Sadie and her husband homeschooled for over 20 years. She served as a Classical Conversations field representative for 15 years, providing community and support for other homeschooling families. Sadie’s passions are to stop government encroachment in areas where they have no authority or jurisdiction and to see Christians return to a biblical Christ-centered worldview.

[1] Giselle Ruhiyyih Ewing, “Biden Calls White Supremacy ‘Most Dangerous Terrorist Threat’ in Speech at Howard,” Politico, May 13, 2023. Accessed 6/24/2024. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/13/biden-howard-university-white-supremacy-terrorism-00096811.

[2]United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “Martin Niemoeller First They Came for Socialists,” Holocaust Encyclopedia, Accessed 6/24/2024. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists

[3] William Butler Yeats, “The Second Coming,” Poetry Foundation. Accessed 6/24/2024. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming