Free Speech: R.I.P.

Posted on May 16, 2015 by Robert Ringer Comments (19)

Font:

In the United States, free speechers and anti-free speechers have long been at odds. But lately, the battle has been getting more and more intense — and the anti-free speechers appear to be winning.

But why is free speech such a big deal anyway? Answer: because it’s supposed to be a safeguard against tyrannical government. So as the anti-free speechers gain momentum, tyrannical government also wins.

In theory, the way free speech is supposed to work is this: If every citizen of America were of one opinion and a single individual had another opinion, the majority would have no more moral right to silence the single dissenter than he (if he had the power to do so) would have to silence them.

Silencing the expression of an opinion is nothing less than theft. It’s not just stealing from the person who holds the opinion that others wish to silence, but also from those who are at odds with his opinion.

How so? Because if the opinion is right, those who disagree are deprived of the opportunity to learn why it is right. On the other hand, if it’s wrong, they lose the opportunity to exercise both their reasoning powers and their powers of persuasion to help the misguided person understand why his opinion is in error.

Also, when anyone stifles an opinion, he can never be 100 percent certain that the opinion is wrong. But even if it were possible for him to know with absolute certainty that the opinion is incorrect, he still would be on the moral low road for trying to drown out someone else’s viewpoint.

The truth is that those who would suppress the opinions of others are not only fallible, they have no natural authority to decide what others should say or hear. Yet, all silencing of discussion clearly implies infallibility on the part of the silencers.

And it’s not just people who are fallible, but whole eras as well. Every age throughout recorded history has held generally accepted opinions that subsequent ages have deemed to be false — often to the point of being absurd — by future generations.

Aristotle once insisted that the earth was the center of the universe and that seven planets — which he believed included the sun and the moon — revolved around it. Based on scientific knowledge available at the time, Aristotle’s pronouncements seemed perfectly reasonable. But the passage of time has made Aristotle’s belief seem quite absurd.

The problem is that new evidence — and enlightenment — in virtually every area of life emerges almost daily, which all too often makes even last year’s experts look foolish. One hundred and fifty years ago, millions of Americans did not believe that slavery was immoral. As a result, America was founded on the principle of equal rights for all — except for those with dark skin!

And no more than fifty years ago, the benefits of cigarette smoking were freely touted on television. The biggest stars were constantly lit up while performing. As a result, left in the wake of the generally accepted opinion that cigarettes were not harmful were such big-name entertainers as Yul Brenner, Sammy Davis Jr., Johnny Carson, and Humphrey Bogart, to name but a few.

When I use the term generally accepted, it underscores just how big the problem is, because the vast majority of people in today’s world are incapable of thinking through a rational opinion on anything but sports and other forms of entertainment. And, come to think of it, they’re usually wrong even in those nonintellectual areas.

Today, the topics that demand no dissenting views are such things as manmade climate change (for which “the science has been settled”), abortion on demand (as “a woman’s right to choose”), and “institutionalized racism” (that flies in the face of the facts).

Unfortunately, however, facts are rarely able to tell their own story. They must be presented by fallible human beings, all of whom harbor their own prejudices and biases.

The truth be known, the person who is best equipped to analyze any fact or set of facts is the individual whose mind is open to criticism of his own opinions and conduct. There’s nothing more impressive than a person who, after studying the facts, concludes that his opinion on some subject has been wrong.

And the most likely path to arrive at such a purifying conclusion is by listening to opposing opinions. It’s the path that leads to greater wisdom. It’s happened to me on more than one occasion, and I can tell you for certain that it’s a cathartic experience that enhances your self-esteem.

Although I have little regard for establishment conservatives, I have an even bigger problem with those on the radical left. While I respect many of them for having an unwavering belief in the philosophy of socialism, Marxist dictum openly calls for the quashing all dissent, and for me that’s an automatic disqualifier.

Once dissent goes underground — at great risk to those who would continue on with it — all that is left for the state to do is brainwash children from a young age, long before they have the ability to develop their deductive reasoning powers.

One last but important point on the subject of repressing free speech: In challenging opinions, it’s helpful to present the most extreme cases possible, because extreme cases put a spotlight on both fact and fiction. Common sense tells us that what is good on a small scale should be good on a big scale as well. Likewise, what’s bad on a small scale should be bad on a big scale.

Nevertheless, big government adherents refuse to see this self-evident fact. When I was a guest on one of Montel Williams’ earliest shows, one of his other guests was a radical socialist professor from USC. After I had stated my case for small government and free markets, the esteemed professor cleared his throat and condescendingly said:

“While I’m sure Mr. Ringer means well, his views are naïve, simplistic, and outdated. He simply does not understand that even though small government, personal freedom, and a free market worked fine when America was a new and small country, as a nation grows and evolves, those ideals become outdated because government is needed to restrain exploiters and protect those in need.”

I had to restrain myself from spilling my hot coffee on his crotch. Personal liberty, of course, has nothing whatsoever to do with the size of a population. Ditto with free markets. In fact, a free market works better when more people are involved. And, of course, small government is always preferable, because as a population increases in size, the temptations for politicians to redistribute wealth, institute repressive regulations, and clamp down on free speech are irresistible.

If an argument cannot stand the test of being pushed to an “extreme,” then it is not valid in the least-extreme scenario either. Today’s anti-free-speech radicals have a closed mind when it comes to hearing extreme cases, because extreme cases highlight logic. Thus, the only way they can protect their positions is to silence those who speak out against them.

Today, though they pretend to be at odds with one another, the truth is that Republicans and Democrats pretty much agree on basic principles, especially the belief that some form of socialism is desirable. And they certainly see no need to argue extreme cases of what happens when a country adopts socialism, because they are in agreement that “it could never happen here.”

Hmm … tell that to the tens of millions of Germans, Russians, and Chinese who perished under the socialist rule of Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Too bad no one wants to consider extreme cases like these as we continue to accept the stifling of free speech with only feigned bit of indignation here and there.

R.I.P. free speech.

Robert Ringer

+Robert Ringer is an American icon whose unique insights into life have helped millions of readers worldwide. He is also the author of two New York Times #1 bestselling books, both of which have been listed by The New York Times among the 15 best-selling motivational books of all time.

19 responses to “Free Speech: R.I.P.”

  1. Liz says:

    The Constitutional stand on "free speech" doesn't guarantee that anyone who wishes can say anything they wish about anything they wish without objections or retaliations from others. If we want speech to be absolutely free we have to make it that way by not stifling those opinions that we disagree with, by not approving punishment for unpopular speech and by not demanding laws that regulate what can be said. How much speech and how much stifling goes on at any time is always in flux depending on who and what viewpoint has got the most influence over public opinion on current events. I don't foresee any future when society will not work this way and that's OK. The important thing is that government needs to stay out of it and not make laws that prohibit and punish the spoken and printed word.

  2. Your "esteemed" professor claimed "He (Ringer) simply does not understand that even though small government, personal freedom, and a free market worked fine when America was a new and small country, as a nation grows and evolves, those ideals become outdated because government is needed to restrain exploiters and protect those in need.”

    What the radical socialist didn't understand is that we must enjoy the existence of a free market (unhampered capitalism) to gain the full benefits of the valuable knowledge individuals use to apply to the billions of problems we face each day. Socialism substitutes the decisions of the few (party leaders) for the decisions of millions—making it a closed system. Capitalism, on the other hand, relies on the decisions of all its citizens making it an open system.

    The USC professor obviously possessed a gigantic ego. It's absurd believing you can make decisions for millions of people. Apparently, he was ignorant of F. A. Hayek’s and Thomas Sowell’s insights on the flow of information (knowledge). Hayek demonstrates that the free market is a discovery process. Sowell shows how the production of a specific form of knowledge helps guide people’s decisions. Tragically, socialists desire to substitute their values for our values.

  3. Jim Hallett says:

    Both free speech and the right to bear arms (to PROTECT that free speech from tyrannical govt.) are essential if any group of people want to live in freedom, as the founders envisioned. Sadly, free speech has died and the right to bear arms is constantly threatened by the libtards, who haven't a clue in their analysis of its importance. The dumbing down of America by the forced schooling establishment, egged on by the presstitutes of the MSM, has borne great fruit for the socialists, and has sounded the death knell for freedom. Other than a total collapse, I don't see individual liberty making a comeback in the U.S. (or most of the West). Thanks for your insights, Robert, and too bad you did not spill coffee on that condescending prof from USC! Having graduated from left-wing U of Mich, I was surrounded by several of his ilk. All govt. wants to grow and attack liberty, which is why small or mini-govt. NEVER works. It is always gobbled up by the totalitarians!

  4. Jorge says:

    In a related topic, the FAT ACCEPTANCE movement is ridiculous

    They shame people who tell them to eat less, and exercise more; they are full of excuses of why they are fat, when it is 100% under your control

    Even the American thyroid Association says that people with SEVERE thyroid problems can add AT MOST 15 lb because of the condition, but now there are more OBESE/OVERWEIGHT people than normal weight people

    The majority is always wrong! =)

  5. David says:

    I've been writing a paper about the freedom of speech in USA with awesome guys from https://essayboo.com/ and came to the conclusion that it's not as bad here that it's like in Russia, for example. We still have lots of things to improve but at least we move forward.

  6. GilG2u says:

    Bit late to the party but . . .

    Exactly. Freedom of speech only means government can't interfere with your rights. "Freedom of speech" doesn't include nebulous concepts such as "the right to be heard, the right to be free from criticism and insults, the right to have your viewpoint to be held as equal with another's, the right to expect others to provide you with a platform for you to speak, etc." The author complains others call him a "denier" with regards to AGW? And? That's freedom of speech in action.

  7. JdLxx says:

    I was with you until you threw in the whine about abortion. All your lip service about defeating large, tyrannical government goes out the window when you have official thugs peering into every doctor's examining room to make sure nothing unapproved goes on there. Robert Ringer, hello and goodbye.

  8. Pat says:

    Ohmy! The PERFECT demonstration of exactly what Robert Ringer was talking about. You can brook no dissent on the question of abortion! THANK YOU for that EXCELLENT DEMONSTRATION!

    Abortion oppresses both women and children. It is an ATROCITY. Abortionists don't care about women. They just care about the Almighty Dollar, the money they can get from invading women's bodies with surgical rape techniques, or poison. They are there COURTESY OF THE GOVERNMENT, which OVERRODE the will of the people. It was judicial activism at its worst, taking away the government's PROTECTION of helpless human beings at the bidding of the abortion racketeering cartel. It is the perfect example of how government chose instead to protect axe-murderers and thieves. It is the government's responsibility to protect the weak and vulnerable. It is the ONLY legitimate function of government. It was never government's job to throw the weak and vulnerable to the wolves.

    If you think most women want or need abortion, I have a bridge to sell you, cheap. Please buy it. I could use the money.

  9. Pat says:

    Sounds like you are a young whippersnapper who has a young metabolism. Just wait until you get older, and see if you sing the same song. Eating too few calories sets you up for obesity in the future. It's a lot more complex than you think it is.

  10. james says:

    I really increase your acquisition. It is really very informative post for young people and hope they will enjoy well after reading this post. Thanks for sharing.http://electricalsafetymattinguk.co.uk

  11. Kendall says:

    It's great to discuss on your ethical focuses and values not all individuals needed what few are actualizing like you have notice in war individuals took after Hitler for instance yet taking after and believing that it will bring that much turmoil was not in their creative energy. Hostile to speeches will dependably win as on the grounds that they loads of focuses against the person who ruled it. Dissertation Experts have composed on numerous events that decision is likewise difficult in the event that you need to open deliberation accompany certainties and figure and on the off chance that you are correct then additionally demonstrate that how you will do it too on the grounds that lone debating about it doing nothing will convey no good thing to both sides.

  12. Bill Poppins says:

    I've been composing a paper about the right to speak freely in USA with magnificent folks from Pay Someone To Do My Essay and reached the conclusion that it's not as awful here that it resembles in Russia, for instance. Regardless we have bunches of things to enhance yet in any event we advance.

  13. Saifammar says:

    Every essay checks for any instances of similarity Dissertation Editing Service at all levels of order to make sure you get find exactly as you mentioned in startup.

  14. Wow, incredible weblog layout! How lengthy have you been running a blog for?

    you make blogging glance easy. The overall look of your website is excellent,

    as neatly as the content!

    http://www.undangancinta.com undangan pernikahan unik <a href="http://www.undangancinta.com” target=”_blank”>www.undangancinta.com

  15. prezzi says:

    Spiders would prefer to live outdoor, where they have accessibility to abundant meal, moisture in addition to protection. They're going to, however, travel inside your own home occasionally if a component of your property provides one among more these things. The best ways connected with repelling spiders in your own home is to scale back their prospects for gain access to.spider control

  16. maidservices says:

    For everybody who is in great have got to move for a new healthier and more prominent place but can be rejecting doing so since you no longer know whereby from to set up packing important things, it might be time, one should call some moving company to find help.cleaning services in dubai

  17. Farman says:

    Very nice informative article.

Leave a Reply