Yesterday I had a rather intriguing conversation about free speech on Twitter. It went something like this:
Jeremy Sear @jeremysear
Albanaese theorises that Greens object to ALP abandonment of the deal because of “internal disunity” within the Greens. Makes total sense.Max Phillips @maxphillips
@jeremysear @AlboMP is fantasisingPreston Towers @prestontowers
@maxphillips @jeremysear And of course @AlboMP knows all about the internal operations of the Greens.Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@prestontowers @maxphillips @jeremysear So frustrating when ppl comment about internal Grn politics when they clearly know nothing about it.Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland Simon, do you object to free public debate of matters of public interest?Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@mattdasilva No. How would my comment lead you to that conclusion?Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland But you said ppl shouldn’t talk abt the Green Party unless they were well informed.Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@mattdasilva No I didn’t. I said it’s frustrating when people who had no idea about how the party works comment on its internal politics.Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@mattdasilva Effectively I’m saying I hate it when people make stuff up about the party’s internal workings.Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland Same thing mate.Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland then put the facts out there.Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@mattdasilva I do. But that doesn’t mean I can’t get frustrated about people making stuff up.Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland And I can say that free speech is the ultimate good.Simon Copland @SimonCopland
@mattdasilva well, I’ll use my free speech to say it frustrates me when ppl make stuff up and I wish they didn’t do it.Matthew da Silva @mattdasilva
@SimonCopland Thjs is very circular.
At the end the conversation did get very circular and we basically ended it there. But it raises a really interesting point about free-speech, and our ability to be critical of other people’s words. It’s the sort of debate that actually happens quite a lot. For example, there was the classic debate last year that the campaign against Alan Jones was ‘anti-free speech’. Or when Margaret Court complained that protests against her anti-gay comments were people trying to stop her from having her opinion.
I think I want to keep my comments about this rather short.
We value free-speech really highly. Yet, free speech does not equal the right to say whatever you want without being questioned. It is not the right to not be criticised for what you say. It’s also not the right to be able to make stuff up in public debate and not have someone call you about it.
And this distinction is really important. We value free speech because we value and open society that allows for open discussion and debate. Yet, when we start to shut down people in this way based on free-speech arguments, we are then actively shutting down this debate. And more importantly than that we are removing any responsibility that exists around free speech – the basic responsibility to be able to defend what you say.
My right to criticise your comments, to question your facts, and to ask you to think before you speak is just as important as your right to say those things in the first place. Let’s remember that.