As I see it, the societal value of a concept like free expression is both a fully public and personal value. As Foucault describes, there is not only a duty from the personal morality of someone to speak truth- but also a responsibility to the public. When an advisor to a King speaks to the truth to keep them in check, they are balancing their personal duty to truth, and the responsibility they have to the public.
I do see America as a culture that favors preserving the individual, however to maintain freedom of expression that individuality may be necessary. As James Madison writes in Article 10 about the importance of factions to be plentiful so as one does not prevail over the others, and the issues of there being too few political factions that cause no sense of unity – it is important to keep this in mind when thinking of the American relationship to freedom of expression
With increase of polarization, it may be more important now than ever to preserve the isegorical parts of expression. Allowing everyone to feel as though they are respected and heard while they sort out their differences. This essay discusses these topics in relation to the modern landscape.
Within a similar vein, freedom of expression contributes to both public and personal identity. Religion and ideology can affect someone’s own perception of themselves, but also how they view society. How a country decides to run its own political system shows how it expresses its beliefs on how its citizens should live, and what the best way to run a government is to the geo-political stage. In Can the Subaltern Speak? The author touches on the complexities of a personal and public expression, and how sometimes efforts to represent the personal to the public can be misrepresented due to a personal identity.
Freedom of Expression is definitely worth protecting. Finding a balance between parrhesia and isegoria are fundamental to protect the ideals of freedom of expression. From my own experience, I think of freedom of expression in relation to journalism. I think of all the countries in which journalists are killed and cannot report on the happenings of the land. I think of NWICO and how the United States still has a monopoly on International Mass Communication, and how other countries’ media industries cannot develop due to this crippling dependence from the West and how that shapes how they express themselves. I think of places like North Korea and China where freedom of expression is limited. But there is a place where freedom of expression is regulated but is helping in ways, like Rwanda. President Kagami monitors language use of the Rwandan genocide in 2012 to help unite the country after the traumatizing event. In general, I believe freedom of expression to be very important to upkeep, but I see where there are instances in which it can be tricky to find a balance for societies.
Leave a Reply