Humanities concepts and applications

Freedom of Speech and Art

"Freedom of speech' is a fundamental right of citizens of the United States. The constitution grants complete freedom of speech under the First Amendment which states:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Americans thus enjoy comparatively more freedom of expression and speech than people in the developing countries. It would be wrong to assume that freedom of speech is absolute even in the U.S. But in our country, we have the privilege to challenge any unjust arrest, ban or suspension if it is found to violate our rights of free speech. However this is certainly not the case in developing countries such as China where freedom of speech is regularly curbed and restricted by the government. One interesting though sad example of this is the lack of freedom to express one's self on the Internet. Internet is not governed by any single body. It is a free domain that every person can access and use it for whatever purposes he likes, even if they are contrary to the beliefs and values held by the government of his country. However China doesn't subscribe to this view. In this country, it appears that all online activities are highly moderated and monitored since in the last few years, many arrests have been made in cases where users said something against the government of the time. There are firewalls, shield and various gateway guards that monitor and filter all political communication on the Internet thus curbing free speech to a large extent. Taipei Times (2005) reports:

'The principle underlying the Golden Shield is that "as virtue rises one foot, vice rises ten." Aided by systems developed by Western intelligence agencies, China has forged a virtual sword that threatens to block the path to democracy." [1]

Internet is not a public restricted domain that can be controlled by the government. In fact it has nothing to do with governmental or national space. It is one thing to stop demonstration or arrest people who speak against the government on national turf, but it is completely another story to make Internet a part of national space and monitor people's activities online. This is an extreme example of violation of freedom of speech but while we may express shock and grief, Chinese people are possibly used to such governmental activities. This is also due to the fact that arrests on the grounds of Internet-based expression is not something new for Chinese people who have viewed many such cases in the last five years.

'From 2000, when the first Chinese "Web criminal" Lin Haiyin was imprisoned for instigating subversive actions, to the recent arrest of writer Shi Tao, more than 100 independent intellectuals have been imprisoned for expressing their views. Internet monitoring is also behind the constant rise in the number of Falun Gong practitioners executed by the state -- a total of 1,692 as of April 18." [1]

Now we need to compare this with freedom of speech in the United States. For one, U.S. allow complete freedom of speech under the Constitution. Secondly, no arrest cases on the grounds of Internet-based expression have come to the limelight so far which shows that while there may be firewalls and shields in some organizations, it is not being done on a national level. This allows people to freely express their views on anything and everything. The one good example of this would be consistent barrage of criticism that President Bush faces on the Internet. His own people call him names and openly criticize his policies and even his personal attributes. But since the constitution allows free speech, there is nothing the congress, the president or the law-enforcing agencies can do to curb or violate it. One pertinent example would be ALA v. Pataki case. In this case, the plaintiff lodged a complaint against N.Y. Penal Law 235.21 which calls for monitoring of internet activities. The NY legislature had amended this law calling Internet 'one of those areas of commerce that must be marked off as a national preserve to protect users from inconsistent legislation that, taken to its most extreme, could paralyze development of the Internet altogether.' [3] On the surface, this amendment appears in the best interest of people especially young children. But it was argued that such laws could restrict freedom of speech and have the potential to violate the First Amendment. Federal District Judge Loretta A. Preska struck down this law with preliminary injunction.

Such actions on part of the judiciary bolster freedom of speech. And this free and unrestricted expression results in unhindered growth of creativity. Creativity then translates into various forms of art and art lays down the foundation of a culture. In societies where freedom of speech and expression is curbed or violated, art and culture die a natural death. The reason we do not see any creativity or original art emerging from developing countries is precisely because of lack of freedom of expression. For example no political paintings or literature is allowed in countries like China where anything said against the government could result in arrests. In a country where journalists can be arrested for releasing political information like in the recent case of Shi Tao, we cannot possibly expect people to be creative since creativity requires free and unhindered flow of expression. Shi Tao was sentenced to a 10-year prison term for releasing sensitive information about 1989 Tiananmen massacre [2]. Growth and promotion of art are thus effectively curbed in these countries and expecting some original creativity emerging from under such strict laws is only an unrealizable dream.