Title: Yes, freedom of speech should be absolute - spiked
Headings: Yes, freedom of speech should be absolute
Yes, freedom of speech should be absolute
Podcast
Why we must never lock down again
spiked
Podcast
Why the left keeps losing
spiked

Content: The fractional loss of liberty entailed in penalising the expression of neo-Nazi views or Holocaust denial seems a small price to pay compared to what can follow if the far right is shielded all the way into power.’ Podcast
Why the left keeps losing
spiked
What becomes clear is that all those who determinedly qualify freedom out of speech don’t really believe in free speech at all. They pose as reasonable and moderate. And they act as if their worries over unfettered free speech are born of a concern for others. But in reality, their problem is that they can only see freedom of speech in negative terms, as something that can cause harm or damage. Which is another way of saying that they see the freedom of other people, their freedom to think and speak for themselves, as a problem, as a source of potential harm. Their putative concern for the welfare of people, then, is really a profound mistrust of people – we’re not deemed capable of handling free speech, and the hustle and sometimes abusive bustle of public life. This is what sets the contemporary pseudo advocacy of free speech, complete with qualifications and caveats, apart from a real belief in free speech of the type that animated the authors of the First Amendment. The Founding Fathers had faith in people’s capacity to act and think for themselves; that is singularly absent today.