Free Speech and its Limits
When does speech cause harm?
These days, everything gets filtered through the pandemic prism of social distancing measures. Our discussions of civil liberties and human rights—topics that obviously predate the pandemic—now cannot even be had apart from situating them against our present context.
In general, this is good—we should do more to actively contextualize abstract and historical concepts to our present social circumstances. But one underexplored area to discuss in light of the pandemic is free speech.
We’re familiar with the discussions asking us to strike a balance between privacy protections and the collective good—such as when we consider how much privacy we should give up, if any at all, to enact meaningful contact tracing protocols. But what about free speech? Does the moment we now find ourselves in suggest a redrawing of parameters?
It is conventional to start a discussion about freedom of speech by considering John Stuart Mill’s principle on prohibiting harm.
What sorts of harms are at stake? Physical harm? Financial hardship? Emotional distress?
In On Liberty, chapter one, Mill writes:
The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to…
