1. Pro's
1.1. Religious Freedom
1.1.1. Cardinal Newman
1.1.1.1. Activist for Catholic's in Education during the 19th Century
1.1.1.1.1. Clear religious agender against the Catholics dating back to 16th Century's Henry VIII's religious revolution for the UK (turning their back on the pope as he wouldn't support divorce)
1.1.1.1.2. Confucius cultivation of virtue as Newman searched for equal rights for his people (Catholics) in 19th Century UK.
1.1.1.1.3. Voltaire believed that religious freedom was a necessity alongside education as he couldn't understand why uneducated people of whom would barely understood religious texts, were killing each other over them. Volitaire would have supported Newman's Goals as it promoted free education from different perspectives across the UK, building for religious discussion rather than religious war
1.1.1.2. Had to leave his position at oxford, trinity college, shunned from the education system after transitioning to start practicing the catholic faith, abandoning the Church of England, the popular faith at the time in the UK.
1.1.1.2.1. Eventually setting up catholic schools, colleges and a university in Dublin, Ireland, often regarded as the pioneer for catholic education in the UK
1.2. Promotion of the contrary views of the powerful to be challenged
1.2.1. Allowing for the Civil rights movements throughout history
1.2.1.1. Race Protests in the USA throughout the 20th Century
1.2.1.1.1. Black Student Movements (1967) , Black Action Movement during the 1970's. and Black Lives matter in recent years.
1.2.1.2. Gender Protests across the western world throughout the 20th Century
1.2.1.2.1. Women's Liberation Movement during the 1960/70's to pursue an educational revolution, encouraging women to enter higher education and achieve higher paying jobs with rolling feminist protests throughout the 21st century
1.2.1.3. LGBT protests throughout the 20th and 21st century
1.2.1.3.1. Stonewall protests in 1969 sparking the movement in the USA
1.2.1.3.2. The day of silence held by GLSEN to remember the silencing students in response to anti LGBT speech in education.
1.2.2. Tiananmen Square Massacre (Student lead protests to try improving education and living standards)
1.2.2.1. This lead to great economic reform throughout China as Deng implemented special economic zones in selected port cities in China to promote trade to other countries. Leading to economic social reform, which in turn allowed for the goals of the protestors to be met.
1.3. Enables the distribution of information
1.3.1. Exposing governments/those in charge
1.3.1.1. Chinese Government suppression of information surrounding the Tienanmen square massacre from the Chinese public, with all records of the event being wiped from Chinese internet
1.3.1.1.1. Although this protest is still heavily recorded and remembered across the world as freedom of speech enables the information to be kept online outside of China.
1.3.1.2. Edward Snowden
1.3.1.2.1. Exposing the US Government of spying on its citizens ad other top NSA secrets
1.3.1.3. University student led protests after the tuition cap got increased whilst a decrease in spending for further education in 2010
1.3.1.3.1. Although this lead to students being unhappy but stuck paying the inflated prices if they want to attend higher education as no counter actions were put into place due to these protests
1.4. No Platforming
1.4.1. Used by organisations such as the NUS, student unions and other speaker events to be able to reject external individuals or groups from spreading their messages at their events
1.4.1.1. Pete Tatchell
1.4.1.1.1. "Freedom of speech doesn't give bigots a free pass, it gives the right and moral imperative to challenge" This would suggest Pete would want speakers from all groups, so they can be challenged in a public debate to try realigning their thinking.
1.4.1.1.2. Against universities "no platforming" students
1.4.1.2. This is due to organisations being for freedom of speech, but not for them people to use it as a tool to take freedom away from others and disrupt the previously safe environment.
2. Hobbes
2.1. He would argue that nothing has a divine right, but simply if something works, why change it?
2.1.1. So if Freedom of speech enables progress in society and allows for discussion and evolution, why take away the peoples claim?
2.1.1.1. When comparing the western world with freedom of speech in comparison to the eastern world is obvious to see the difference in quality of life for the average person in the population.
2.1.2. If freedom of speech is causing great pain to the masses then he would suggest taking it away, but only when extremes are hit because life without the divine right for freedom of speech could lead the decline of society and education
3. examples of 'no platforming' historically and the negative consequences because of the voice of the people not being heard, like opposition parties being unheard of, subsequently living under a suppressive rule, not allowing for differing opinions or democratic votes to decide on the future of a country with devastating human right consequences
4. Cons's
4.1. When taken into the wrong context, free speech can be used as a tool for spreading negative messages.
4.1.1. Whilst quotes like this from Voltaire "I disapprove of what you say, but i will defend to the death your right to say it." can be interpreted by bigots to defend their right to be abusive to certain groups of people in their speech.
4.1.1.1. Suggesting that although the power of freedom of speech can be used to influence society into a new Eudaimonia, it can also be used to bring forth the bad virtues from a persons character to inflict damage onto another.
4.1.2. freedom of speech has been used to provoke people throughout history to try to get physical reactions as this is illegal, getting the person who maybe didn't want to do wrong at first in trouble, because they've assaulted someone for using derogatorily terms against them (eg racism, sexism etc).
4.2. In the context of historical and modern foreign suppression of speech has lead to numerous human right violations
4.2.1. Russia
4.2.1.1. Modern
4.2.1.1.1. Freedom of speech is still restricted in todays world
4.2.1.1.2. Protesting "legal" in Russia although fines and 3 year prison sentences have been handed out due to single person pickets and larger demonstrations, and people have been imprisoned for larger protests, eg Julia Tsvetkova
4.2.1.2. Historical
4.2.1.2.1. Freedom of speech banned in the soviet union for most of the 20th century, with "Glasnost" being introduced in 1986.
4.2.1.2.2. Education was hugely revolutionised after Stalin was put into power in 1922, with the government successfully brainwashing the country into believing the new information given to them
4.2.1.2.3. Despite the limits on freedom of speech, education was the foremost of the soviet unions plans, with the adult literacy rate going from (an average of men and women) 51% in 1926 to 75% in 1939, and nearly 100% by the end of the soviet rule
4.2.2. China
4.2.2.1. Modern
4.2.2.1.1. Winnie the Pooh Banned in China after Jinping being compared to him in numerous photos
4.2.2.1.2. HBO Banned in China after John Olivers Piece on Jinping, subsequently erasing John Oliver from Chinese internet.
4.2.2.1.3. Chinese social credit system stops Chinese people from freely expressing themselves as their scores can be lowered for little things like playing music too loud, eating on the tube etc
4.2.2.1.4. Google and other tech companies forced to redevelop their products to fit into the Chinese regime, censoring certain ideas and events to the Chinese public
4.2.2.2. Historical
4.2.2.2.1. Tienanmen Square Massacre/Student Lead Protest reduced to including hunger strikes in an attempt to have their voices heard
4.3. Although this education provided many people with literacy and numeracy skills they'd never had before, any further education was skewered into soviet light. (for example, how Stalin was Lenin's right hand man according to soviet history books, whilst in reality Lenin final testament said to dispel Stalin from the Party as he knew he would go crazy with power.
4.3.1. But Stalin put to bed his testament and imposed a new one to the soviet union where he was seen as the rightful air to Lenin's throne. (by killing anyone who said otherwise and forcing his rival (Trotsky) to flee to south america, imposing on freedom of speech)
4.4. Freedom of speech isn't really free as its still illegal to say or not say certain things on certain topics
4.4.1. It's illegal in modern day Germany to perform the Nazi salute due to its historical meaning.
4.4.1.1. limiting freedom of speech to certain people, but in the general public opinion is a censorship that was necessary for society to continue due to the horrific human rights violations enacted by the political party at the time, making it taboo worldwide.
4.4.2. Public opinion
4.4.2.1. Mob Mentality
4.4.2.1.1. Twitter has destroyed multiple peoples careers because of something they may have said many years ago, prompting the question are they free to say whatever?
4.4.2.2. Voltaire "Opinion rules the world, but in the long run its the philosophers that shape opinion.
4.4.2.2.1. In history this could be seen as true, but with the rise of platforms such as twitter anyone's opinions can be heard and make a difference, for example when mob mentality of a 'Karen' is heard and distributed across the internet
4.4.2.3. Many words and phrases/actions aren't illegal but are taboo/looked down upon in western society.
4.4.2.3.1. Causing discussions and uproar from sections of a society that may have very little significance in someone else's life.
4.5. Freedom of speech will split society into three groups onto any subject matter, 'I agree', 'i disagree' and 'I dont care'
4.5.1. People then feel their Kantian duty to defend their viewpoint against others, sometimes to extremes
4.5.1.1. As the person defending their viewpoint thinks that if they don't speak out they're hindering someone else's life because their in the wrong view point.
4.5.1.1.1. As discussions become more extreme/passionate a persons view becomes more rigid and the idea of compromise becomes foreign.
4.5.2. This creates discussion within communities and ultimately is the reason human life has managed to evolve so much in the past two thousand years
4.5.2.1. For example the the debate of science vs religion, if there was no free speech and the ability for people to discover and research the human race could possibly still be living like a slightly more modern medieval society.
4.5.2.2. Without this discussion the people could be subject to a bad quality of life as dictators rules.
4.5.2.2.1. Hobbes would argue that having a dictator is only bad when they become a tyranny and abuse their power to the point of the countries civilians dying because of their rule and instead some sort of leader is needed to keep order in the world
4.5.2.3. Although to counter this the worst dictators in the world have seen some of the largest economic growth and social climate change in recent history
4.5.2.3.1. for ex ample, Hitler did a magnificent job in restructuring the economy, that was in pieces after Germany had bills to pay after WW1. Whilst also getting his people organised into a hypothetical production factory of growth, with one of the aims being that everyone had their own car and home. This wasn't something anyone throughout history has been close to achieving since.
4.5.2.3.2. Stalin took Russia out of the dark ages in relative comparison to the rest of Europe and brought it forward to being a world super power on a similar level to the USA