The True Meaning of Freedom of Speech
Who gets to speak freely—and who pays the price for speaking?
🌟 Introduction
Freedom of speech is one of the West’s most cherished ideals—the symbolic cornerstone of liberal democracy. Nations like the United States, Germany, France, and the UK often claim moral authority globally by holding up their free speech laws as a model for others. But beneath the polished rhetoric lies a paradox: societies that present themselves as champions of free expression increasingly curate and criminalise dissent.
Just ask the thousands of peaceful protestors in Europe and the United States who have taken to the streets to oppose the Israeli government’s actions in Gaza. Far from being protected by the law, many of them have been brutalised by police, banned from public squares, or violently attacked by mobs, with little to no institutional protection.
In Germany and the UK, Palestinian solidarity demonstrations have been cancelled or criminalised. In the U.S., college students face suspension or blacklisting or even deportation for expressing political opinions.
These are not fringe exceptions; they are systemic contradictions. Western governments routinely condemn authoritarian crackdowns abroad while engaging in censorship, surveillance, and repression at home.
“We must fight for [freedom of expression] as if it never existed.”
— Yanis Varoufakis
This edition of the True Meaning Series explores the semiotics of freedom of speech. What does it say? What does it mean? Who is protected by it—and who is punished? And what happens when the world’s so-called guardians of liberty begin to resemble the regimes they critique?
🔍 What It Says vs. What It Means
🗽 Free Speech is a Right
What it says: Everyone has the right to voice their opinions, even if controversial.
What it means: This right often protects the powerful more than the marginalised. Speech reinforcing dominant ideologies is celebrated, while speech threatening power structures is policed.
🛑 Hate Speech Must Be Prevented
What it says: Laws exist to protect minorities from incitement and violence.
What it means: The definition of "hate speech" is selectively enforced. Criticism of Israel is labelled antisemitic, while dehumanising language about Muslims or Palestinians is ignored or legitimised.
🛡️ Democracy Depends on Free Speech
What it says: An open society must allow open debate.
What it means: Speech is free only when it does not threaten the state's foundational myths or foreign alliances.
🚷 Dissent is Protected
What it says: Peaceful protest is a hallmark of a functioning democracy.
What it means: In practice, dissenters are surveilled, brutalised, and silenced—especially when their cause is politically inconvenient.
📣 Everyone Has a Platform
What it says: The internet gives everyone a voice.
What it means: Platforms amplify dominant narratives and suppress controversial ones through shadowbans, algorithmic suppression, platform censorship and demonetisation.
🧠 The Semiotics of Silencing
Language plays a central role in shaping who is seen as a truth-teller and who is painted as a threat. The freedom to speak is not just about legal protections; it’s about how speech is interpreted, framed, and legitimised. Here are the key codes of silencing at work:
📏 Rebranding Dissent as Extremism
Activists calling for Palestinian rights are labelled as threats to public order, security, or "cohesion." Language is used to reframe peaceful protest as incitement, making it easier to justify bans, arrests, or surveillance.
📕 The Language of Order and Safety
Governments often invoke terms like "public safety" or "communal harmony" when suppressing speech. These euphemisms turn censorship into a protective measure, obscuring the political motivations behind repression.
📺 Media Gatekeeping
Mainstream media often frames controversial speech through the lens of "tensions," "clashes," or "radicalism." Protestors rarely have space to articulate their message on their terms, and algorithms suppress content that challenges official narratives.
⚖️ Moral Inversions
Criticism of Israeli state policy is recoded as antisemitism, while the violent erasure of Palestinian lives is reframed as self-defence. This moral coding shifts the focus away from injustice and toward defending the state's image.
🔒 Institutional Chilling
Academics, journalists, and artists face blacklisting, funding withdrawal, termination or even deportation if they are visitors for speech deemed controversial. The message is clear: certain truths come at a professional cost.
📍 Case Study: Europe’s Free Speech Mirage
Nowhere is the contradiction between Western free speech and its limitations more visible than in Europe, particularly in Germany. A country that claims to uphold liberal democratic values has banned pro-Palestinian protests in the name of public order, arrested demonstrators for carrying keffiyehs or Palestinian flags, and prevented journalists from covering these events.
In one widely reported incident, peaceful demonstrators in Berlin were met with riot police, while far-right counter-protesters who incited violence were left unchecked. This selective enforcement sends a clear message: not all speech is protected—only the kind that aligns with state narratives.
In the UK, student activists have been vilified for calling attention to Israel’s military actions, with university administrators and media outlets quick to brand them as hateful or extremist. Meanwhile, the state has taken no action against groups openly threatening them on campuses or online.
These examples demonstrate how Western nations, while projecting moral superiority, fail to meet the democratic standards they impose on others. The suppression of protest, the criminalisation of solidarity, and the brutalisation of peaceful voices are tactics indistinguishable from those employed by the very regimes they criticise.
⚡ The Impact of Freedom of Speech Speak
Freedom of speech, in its ideal form, is a tool for accountability and liberation. But in its distorted version, it becomes a facade—used to justify the suppression of the very voices it claims to protect.
📌 Delegitimisation of Dissent
When criticism is equated with extremism, entire movements are painted as dangerous. This erodes the legitimacy of human rights advocacy and fuels public apathy or hostility towards it.
📌 Chilling Effect on Expression
Activists, academics, and everyday citizens are hesitant to speak publicly or post online due to concerns about legal, social, or professional repercussions.
📌 Erosion of Democratic Credibility
Western nations lose their moral high ground when they silence peaceful protests while preaching human rights abroad. The hypocrisy weakens international credibility.
📌 Radicalisation Through Suppression
When peaceful means of expression are blocked, individuals may become more radical or desperate, feeling excluded from legitimate public discourse.
📌 Reinforcement of Power Structures
The current system protects speech that maintains the status quo, whether economic, racial, or geopolitical. It reinforces dominant narratives and discredits transformative ideas.
In short, when freedom of speech is applied selectively, it ceases to be a right. It becomes a privilege.
💡 Actionable Insights
🧠 Reclaim the Meaning of Free Speech
Freedom of speech must be consistent to be credible. It should protect uncomfortable truths and inconvenient voices, not just the narratives of power.
📣 Call Out Double Standards
If speech is suppressed in the name of safety, ask: Whose safety is it? If protests are banned, ask: Whose discomfort are we prioritising? Apply this lens relentlessly.
📚 Educate on What Free Speech Actually Entails
Speech protection is not a reward for civility—it exists precisely to safeguard dissent. Educate peers and audiences about how and why these rights were fought for in the first place.
🌍 Show Solidarity Across Borders
When speech is silenced in Berlin, it should be amplified in Istanbul, New York, or Johannesburg. Freedom of speech is not just a national value—it’s a global necessity.
🛠️ Support the Silenced
Use your platform, whether big or small, to amplify voices that are being actively suppressed. Give visibility to those who risk everything to speak up.
🧭 Practice and Defend Speech Ethically
Free speech isn't just about saying what you want. It’s about being responsible with the power of language—and defending others' right to use it, too.
🎤 Conclusion
Free speech is often celebrated as a pillar of democracy, but its meaning becomes distorted when used as a selective control tool. Today, we’re witnessing not a free marketplace of ideas, but a curated arena where speech is rewarded or punished based on how well it aligns with dominant interests.
To protect the principle of freedom of speech, we must be willing to defend it precisely where it is under threat—where protestors are beaten, voices are censored, and truths are inconvenient.
If we don't, freedom of speech becomes a myth—an empty slogan wrapped in flags and exceptions.
🚀 If you found this edition of the True Meaning Series valuable, consider becoming a paid subscriber. You'll gain access to deeper insights, exclusive content, and a growing community that dares to challenge the narratives shaping our world.
