Speech Has Never Been Free, and That’s Good
Censorship always exists. The question is to what end.
The one thing speech isn’t is free. There are costs to those who produce it and costs to those who are subjected to it. Of course, the term “free speech” does have a clear meaning under the Constitution: If you want to say something, you don’t have to ask the government’s permission, and you won’t be punished by the government for saying it. But even this freedom from state interference with your speech has its limits, and it does not protect you in private life, where speaking out carries with it the risk of censorship and penalty.
Supreme Court First Amendment decisions have told us that flag burning is speech and that saying to a policeman, “You’re a fascist,” isn’t. If speech can be categorized as “symbolic action” (because it has an effect the state finds distressing) and action can be categorized as speech (because it sends a message the state wants to protect), isn’t the distinction infinitely manipulable? How do you draw the line, and who should be authorized to draw it?
Suppose we could answer those questions and come up with a generally accepted definition of what is speech and what isn’t. With that definition in place, is a citizen free to engage in speech without fear of repercussions? Not really, for there are “time…
