Freedom of speech

Freedom of speech or free speech is the position which argues that the right of individuals to express their views freely and without censorship or discouragement by the state or some other social body is a basic human right to be afforded to all citizens. The standard liberal conception even by strong free speech advocates overwhelmingly tends to make exceptions for threats, harassment, and inciting violence, but aside from these the concept of free speech varies considerably over what is and is not considered "protected speech". Ancient Athenian society had an even more radical conception of free speech which encompassed the related but separate concepts of parrhesia and isēgoríā. Freedom of speech is considered to be a basic right in many varieties of liberalism and therefore exists in most Western states. The conception of free speech in countries like the United States, whose constitution explicitly protects free speech, is broader and more protective of different views; for example, the displaying of communist and fascist symbols is allowed where one or both may be banned in many parts of Europe or Asia. The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, an important liberal manifesto of the 20th century, holds that free speech is a human right and should be supported by all world governments.

Despte its expressed support for an egalitarian ideal of free speech, in reality liberal society has an inherent bias against the political speech of poor and working-class people, minority racial and ethnic groups, and the expression of anti-capitalist and anti-imperialist views. Most Marxists, as well as Karl Marx himself, support the political expediency of free speech for the growth and propagation of a leftist movement while also criticizing it for its idealist distortion of the reality of political discourse in a liberal society.

As Big Tech companies have gained a larger and larger share of influence over the means of mass communication and political debate, these private entities have increasingly played a role in censorship and suppression of politically unacceptable and socially controversial views, a practice which has been exhaustively documented.

Some leftists, as well as most radlibs and social liberals, however, argue that the principles of free speech should not prevent private companies, including corporations, websites, businesses, entertainment venues, and even media outlets from suppressing certain views. This argument is typically deployed against far-right groups and often used in conjunction with the adage "Freedom from censorship does not equal freedom from consequences", implying that suppression of far-right or reactionary speech is a permissible form of suppressing hateful or offensive speech. On the other end, others argue that Big Tech has become a new public square and should be treated as public utilities and be nationalised to protect free speech.

Free speech is often a controversial and divisive issue within leftist spaces, particularly concerning whether it is politically useful or morally acceptable to suppress far-right views. Leftist advocates of a strong liberal conception of free speech, such as American author Noam Chomsky, argue free speech should not be infringed even for the far right, while many other groups fully or critically support the suppression of right-wing views by large corporations and government entities. Far-right groups, however, overwhelmingly tend to oppose freedom of speech, and far-right governments always suppress dissident views even when they express support for freedom of speech as a concept.