The history of free speech
The history of free speech
My conversation with Danish lawyer, human-rights advocate and author Jacob Mchangama
Appears in this episode
It’s hard to imagine better timing for a book release. This week — as our culture finds itself embroiled in numerous debates around speech — Danish lawyer Jacob Mchangama has published a brilliant new book that provides historical perspective.
Jacob is the founder and executive director of Justitia, a human-rights think tank based in Copenhagen. Free Speech: A History From Socrates to Social Media is a deeply-researched, engaging, and humane title that grew out of Clear and Present Danger, Jacob’s podcast project on the global history of free speech.
I’m so pleased to have Jacob Mchangama as my guest on the podcast. Here is our wide-ranging discussion, taped last week, in which he touches on everything from Athenian democracy to Orwell and Mandela — and makes the case that censorship is not a good solution to the societal tensions we are living through.
The history of free speech
what i found interesting was the concept that "minoities" had won so many victories and were in such a prominent place in Canada that they no longer need free speech. I have felt over the last few years that we are being ruled by minorities, not only in voting federally but in power over government. The Liberals are completely obsessed with each passing social fad and demonizes anyone who speaks out about them along with their alllies in the mainstream media. Urban liberals ARE terrified of the broader public's free speech because it undermines their power over what is acceptable and what isn't in this country. Personally I have traditionally been on the left and always respected those that rallied for free speech and I haven't changed much at all in that regard although the makeup of the left HAS changed significantly and their priorities as well. I feel politically homeless in a time of weak opposition to Trudeau, and where the elites in Canada have revealed themselves to be quite focused on shutting us all up by calling people racists. It's disgusting.
Thank you, Tara, for the interesting and insightful interview. I was particularly struck by this idea of “dangerous speech.” I have not read Susan Benesch’s description of this concept, but will certainly do that. However, I did scan through some Canadian mainstream media articles focusing on this idea that “calling the trucker protest peaceful plays down its non-violent dangers.” These articles appeared to me to be coming from the one-sided place of negatively framing and slandering the protest on the basis of a few isolated incidents which are not at its core at all. I haven’t been in Ottawa during the protest, but the objective and non-biased footage and news reports of it show a very different picture than what is portrayed in the mainstream media. All one has to do is look at the crowds of people lining the overpasses on the truckers’ route across Canada, waving their Canadian flags in frigid weather, to see and understand the heartfelt and unifying intent and force behind this protest. Is this expression “dangerous speech”? On the other hand, there has been very little in the MSM criticizing Trudeau’s characterization of the Canadian citizens as “championing hate, abuse, and racism,” calling them (us) a “small fringe minority of people holding unacceptable views,” and calling people who choose not to be vaccinated “racist and misogynist extremists” and “science deniers.”
Here’s another gem: “ It’s a very small group, but that doesn’t shy away from the fact that they take up some space.” You bet we do! And yet another: “ This leads us, as a leader and a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?” Might these statements of Trudeau be considered “dangerous speech,” or does he somehow get a free pass on “free speech” because he’s in a position of power?