What is free speech?

Here we’re going to see what free speech is and its role in western societies. We’re flying in.

Today, I want to speak to you about freedom of speech. That’s a controversial topic, especially when someone else is eager to curtail it in some way. Some people argue that free speech isn’t absolute, and they’re right because there are some legal restrictions. However, in the middle of these debates about the limits of freedom of expression, we forget the meaning of this concept and why it’s part of our current political culture in western countries. So, it’s time to take a look and find out the reality of free speech and how it shaped the last centuries.

What is freedom of speech?

Freedom of speech is a principle with vast political implications. It means the freedom of an individual or community to express their opinions and ideas without fear of retaliation, censorship, or legal punishment. Nowadays, it seems very reasonable in our societies. However, in the past, things were quite different, and this principle didn’t have general acceptation.

The origins of this concept are usually located in Ancient Athens for western societies. However, our contemporary idea of free speech has much to do with the modern European age. For this reason, it’s convenient to go over the history and see the political formation and evolution of this value.

Origins and evolution of freedom of speech

Religion was an element of social cohesion in the Middle Ages. In the West, we observe how the Church influenced society with its moral authority. People, at that time, considered this institution the custodian of revelation, and therefore, a source of legitimacy. Indeed, there was an identification of the Church with the community itself.

So, the Church had a dominant position in social affairs as far as to say what was right and valid, and what was inadmissible. It provided secular rulers with legitimacy by threatening them with excommunication. In this way, the Church exercised an ideological power. It established its doctrine as the truth all believers had to follow. Those who didn’t observe its doctrine were considered heretics and prosecuted by its courts. Indeed, in the Middle Ages, there were many wars against those who disagreed with the Church precepts because they were considered a threat to social order.

Then, the question is, when does freedom of speech start? I have to mention two different processes. One of them is the struggle of the State against the Church. And the other one is the development of a community of intellectuals across western Europe. Let’s see them.

The origins of freedom of speech have a relation with the State formation process. It doesn’t mean that the birth of the modern State brought about this principle for social organization. However, it contributed to eroding the ideological hegemony of the Church. And that was a watershed in the later development of free speech.

It would take too much time to discuss the whole process, so, for now, I’m going to set forth the main facts.

First, I have to stress that the social and political stage in western Europe was complex in the Middle Ages. And still in modern times. But in the Middle Ages, two institutions were competing for supremacy in the Christendom. They were the Church and the Holy Empire. Besides them, there were other minor institutions such as kingdoms, free cities, and so on.

The struggle between the Church and the Holy Empire is in the core of the western medieval history. In this context, European kings tried to take advantage of that rivalry to strengthen their political position. That’s why in the Late Middle Ages, we observe some critical changes in this respect.

For instance, during the reign of Philip IV of France, the State gained ground insofar as the crown reinforced its authority in the realm. To do so, the king resorted to scholars to develop a particular doctrine about his authority, and claim his political supremacy before the pope. Despite the religious basis of most of his arguments, it was a step forward to diminish the Church’s ideological influence. From then on, the State increased its power up to the point of prevailing over the Church and using it for its purposes.

Kings were modernizers because power tends to break any constrain to reinforce itself. That includes moral rules, customs, and other social conventions. Indeed, the beginning of modern times is in the medieval period insofar as kings started to break traditional customs to get more autonomy and strengthen their political authority.

However, this process of modernization, if we consider it a break with the past and traditions, has another dimension. I refer to the political stage in the West. There was a significant dispersion of power that forced kings to bargain with their subjects. There were medieval chambers in which different social groups of the whole realm had representation. So, the existence of these chambers meant the possibility to complain and bring grievances before the king to achieve justice.

Although these chambers didn’t have executive powers and were mainly deliberative, they involved the possibility of expressing opinions and set forth ideas for debate. However, the development of absolute monarchies tended to infringe on these liberties and break the traditional conventions. In any case, these measures from the crown had consequences and stirred up political turmoil. Insofar as consent was present in the medieval government, the king’s attempts to rule alone fueled political conflict that led people to vindicate specific rights.

A clear example of this was the English seventeenth century when a series of different kings tried to rule without the parliament. The resulting situation was a political conflict that led the members of parliament to constrain the king’s powers to prevent arbitrariness. Among the different vindications of MP’s, there was freedom of speech. Absolute kings used to jail and to prosecute those who opposed them. Besides this, they usually resorted to religion to control people by forbidding other religious beliefs.

In any case, the English experience was critical in the development of free speech. The Glorious Revolution was a tipping point in this process because it led to establishing the constitutional right of freedom of expression in parliament with the approval of the Bill of Rights.

The Glorious Revolution and the freedom of speech

It would take much time to discuss this aspect of free speech, but I’ll say a few words to summarize the most relevant events regarding the birth of this right. 

In the 1680s arose a conflict between the parliament and King James II.

The cause was the way James II was running the country. There were two different political models, and they were incompatible. On the one hand, James II, with his court, tried to assert his political supremacy and rule alone. He used his royal prerogative of dispensing with parliament’s laws. In this way, he appointed his loyalists to different posts and suspended laws. And at the same time, he sought to impose Catholicism by repressing other confessions. He dismissed those who didn’t share his political beliefs from relevant posts, especially in the judiciary. In addition to this, he supported Catholicism in education and public life.

Therefore, James II damaged the religious coexistence in England by trying to impose his religion and constraining other beliefs. It had consequences in politics, and especially in the political organization insofar as his model was a copy of absolutist France. Aside from other measures James II took, such as the expansion of secret services that intercepted and confiscated letters, this dynamic caused great concern in the country, especially among MP’s. They saw how their king sought to silence dissenters and favor loyalists.

So, the opposition to the king joined together to expel him and assert the parliament’s political supremacy. Besides those liberties, James II had damaged. The triumphant revolution established the Bill of Rights that declared freedom of speech. Revolutionaries banned the prosecution of political beliefs and opinions. Furthermore, they enacted that debates or proceedings in parliament shouldn’t be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of parliament.

What I’ve told you is part of the whole history of free speech. Nevertheless, there is more. I’m going to speak about the community of intellectuals in western Europe.

The role of culture in the formation of free speech

Monasteries, public grammar schools, collegiate churches, universities, and so on, thrived across western Europe in the late Middle Ages. They were cultural hubs for intellectuals. The political fragmentation of Europe, besides the numerous waterways connecting scattered cities in the region, made an easier cultural and intellectual exchange. That also made possible the development of new researches and ideas. The invention of the printing press boosted this process with the growth of published books, scholar journals, and the transfer of new ideas, knowledge, and so forth.

This cultural context allowed the formation of a European community of scholars from different countries. That sparked intellectual debates, but also the spread of new ideas in several realms, which contributed to critical changes in science, philosophy, law, and so on. In addition to this, the effect of the Reformation was crucial at all levels. For instance, its ideas and practices led to theories about limiting established authority. The importance of individual conscience was remarkable for the later appearance of freedom of speech. This notion combined with the emergence of rationalist philosophy, despite its medieval origins.

Furthermore, new theories and arguments justifying resistance to rulers became popular. These ideas took shape among those who opposed absolute monarchies and vindicated certain natural rights. They set the foundations of resistance to authority, and in some way, advanced the freedom of expression. In this respect, we find the enlightening example of the Low Countries. It represents an antecedent of free speech through religious toleration.

Religious wars were a critical factor in the advancement of freedom of speech. We can’t forget the role of well-organized protestant minorities who demanded rights in various European countries, as well as toleration.

In sum, a set of different factors such as political fragmentation, the existence of universities and other educative institutions that favored a thriving community of scholars, and the role of the Reformation, contributed to the appearance of freedom of expression.

The recent evolution of free speech and its current constraints

I don’t want to finish this discussion without mentioning the recent evolution of this principle, as well as some ideas related to its current situation. I refer to the limits of free speech.

Regarding the process that led to the acceptance of freedom of speech in western countries, I have to stress the already mentioned English Bill of Rights. But also, the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen, adopted during the French Revolution in 1789. It affirmed freedom of speech as an inalienable right. And last but not least, the first amendment of the US constitution. They all are milestones in the spread of this right in the West. And they also are remarkable examples of the importance of this principle.

Nevertheless, the incorporation of freedom of expression to the constitutional order hasn’t been smooth, especially in those countries that went through absolute monarchy. In any case, the recent experience has shown it isn’t easier to keep this right when restrictions are incorporated into the legislation.

Free speech is not an absolute right, but it has several limitations. Probably too many, but that discussion is for another occasion. Among the most common constraints of freedom of expression, we find libel, slander, intellectual property, sedition, classified information, trade secrets, confidentiality agreements, food labeling, pornography, incitement, the right to privacy, public security, perjury, the right to be forgotten and obscenity. Some of these restrictions are necessary, but others are debatable.

Nowadays, we’re witnessing a new wave of constraints with the legislation of hate speech. A protectionist policy guided by political correctness that resorts to a condescending approach to tackle problems of some minorities. Its main consequence is the curtailment of this right in many different ways.

Question of the day

Question of the day! Do you think freedom of speech is in danger in western countries? If so, tell why. Post your opinion in the comments section below, and I’ll check it out.

Bibliography used:

Creveld, Martin Van, The Rise and Decline of the State

Pincus, Steve, 1688: The First Modern Revolution

Daly, Jonathan, The Rise of Western Power

Williams, E. N., The Eighteenth-Century Constitution. 1688–1815

Mill, John Stuart, On Liberty

Le Goff, Jacques, Intellectuals in the Middle Ages

Wesson, Robert, State Systems: International Pluralism, Politics and Culture

Little, A. G., “Theological Schools in Medieval England” in The English Historical Review 55(210), 1940, pp. 624-630

Huppert, George, Public Schools in Renaissance France

Lindberg, Carter, The European Reformations

Grahl-Madsen, Atle, “The European Tradition of Asylum and the Development of Refugee Law” in Journal of Peace Researche 3(3), 1966, pp. 278-289

Fix, Andrew, “Radical Reformation and Second Reformation in Holland: The Intellectual Consequences of the Sixteenth-Century Religious Upheaval and the Coming of a Rational World View” in The Sixteenth Century Journal 18(1), 1987, pp. 63-80

Skinner, Quentin, The Foundations of Modern Political Thought: The Age of Reformation

Saenger, Paul, “The Earliest French Resistance Theories: The Rule of the Burgundian Court” in The Journal of Modern History 51(4), 1979, pp. D1225-D1249

Calvin, John, Institution of the Christian Religion

Hunt, Lynn, Inventing Human Rights: A History

Gregory, Brad S., The Unintended Reformation: How a Religious Revolution Secularized Society

Hudson, Winthrop S., “Democratic Freedom and Religious Faith in the Reformed Tradition” in Church History 15(3), 1946, pp. 177-194

Disclosure: Some of these links are affiliate links where I’ll earn a small commission if you make a purchase at no additional cost to you. As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.