The Theory of Free Speech/Democracy

Meiklejohn’s Theory of Free Speech and Democracy

Alexander Meiklejohn, in his work Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-Government, explains why free speech is such a useful resource in a democracy. Candidates for office need to be able to speak freely so that voters can hear all of the arguments before they cast their ballots. By doing so, citizens can make informed decisions regarding who they wish to have govern them and what needs to be done by way of policy.

Why Elections Depend on Free Speech

The stronger the democracy, the more important it is that the voters understand what they are voting on. If the representatives are not able to express their opinions freely, or if there are unclear issues provided, the voters will never understand the true story. Without clear information, it is much harder for them to make smart and educated choices. For example, a local election about highway repair. Candidates running for mayor wanted to talk about repairing highways but were not allowed to present their ideas, voters would have no clue what these candidates intend. A comparison we see today often is that, environmental groups typically get shut down about pollution, and citizens generally have no clue that there is a serious problem in their own community. The issue along with silence essentially harms democracy because it keeps voters in the dark about what they're supposed to know. The important aspect is that an electorate is required to self-rule. Which means that the voters need to thoroughly understand the issues and in result can compare the positions of different candidates. This allows a better stand of making informed decisions about who will be in power and what policies to support.

Spreading Public Awareness

Meiklejohn argues that a democracy depends on an educated public, people who understand how their government and society work. To be truly informed, citizens need to hear different perspectives and viewpoints from others so they can think carefully about issues and make wise decisions for themselves and their communities. When different people are able to open their mouths freely without restriction, that is a type of public space where ideas get challenged and criticized. Criticism is a superb way to find issues. Great ideas get backing, while awful ideas get crushed and thrown away. This system would only work if every member was considered worthy of taking part in the discussion without any limits. When the government tries to silence certain political ideas or stops people from talking about issues that matter to them, it goes too far. This keeps people from hearing different opinions and makes it harder for them to think carefully about issues that affect their decisions.

Why Restricting Political Speech is Harmful

Even political statements that might seem awkward or offensive to some people still need protection from censorship. Meiklejohn believes that democracy works best when the government allows open public debate instead of deciding what can or cannot be said on its own. Sometimes political statements can be false or careless. But Meiklejohn says that is not a reason to restrict them. Instead, false statements give people a chance to respond and debate, so citizens can hear both sides and decide for themselves what to believe. A more serious problem happens when the government decides which political opinions people are allowed to hear. Often, politicians may allow some claims but try to block opinions that disagree with them. If opposing opinions are silenced or important information is hidden from citizens, elections would be unfair and democracy would not work properly.

Conclusion

Alexander Meiklejohn’s ideas show why protecting free speech is so important for democracy. When people can share their ideas freely, citizens are able to vote with understanding and make informed choices. Political speech might cause disagreement or even upset some people, but Meiklejohn believes this is better than letting the government control who knows what about politics and policies.

Sources:

Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-Government (1948) – Library of Congress

Stephen Bates, “Meiklejohn, Hocking, and Self-Government Theory” – UNLV Scholarly Repository

John P. Frank, Book Review of Free Speech and Its Relation to Self-Government – Indiana University Law Repository

Review in The Georgetown Law Journal (1949)