Democracy: An Essential Step for Freedom of Speech and Mutual Trust - Essay Sample

Introduction

Before the introduction of democracy in many countries, people could be prosecuted for speaking out what is in their minds. Freedom of speech refers to the rights given to the people to openly criticize the government and other institutions without the fear of intimidation or prosecution by the people in power. Creating mutual trust between the government and its citizens is the main driving force of democracy. However, in countries practicing dictatorship, the government victimizes its citizens and limits their speech to what is pleasant to them. In a land where human rights apply to those in power while the ordinary citizens only speak what they are permitted to say, the development is doomed. Although freedom of speech has both merits and demerits, in many formal and informal settings, allowing people to speak out freely, their minds result in massive benefits to both parties.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Freedom of speech results in accountability and transparency in government officials. In a dictatorial government, leaders are not held accountable for their actions. The media and the citizens are timid, and they only speak out when they have been cornered to the extreme due to the fear of victimization. However, the liberty to free speech has enabled the citizens to freely speak out against mismanagement of public funds, abuse of power, or unfair treatment from the government. Leaders have been exposed for committing a capital offense and disregarding humanity. Therefore the notion that some people from the government are above the law has been broken and equality upheld. Consequently, malpractices in the government offices have reduced owing to the fear of the illicit behavior being publicized.

Democracy in the working environment ensures that the employees are treated as relevant stakeholders rather than slaves. They are allowed to present their ideas and air their grievances to the employers. In a formal sector where liberty to free speech is not exercised, the workers may be treated as robots whose only function is to execute the duties given to them using the laid-out strategy. However, freedom to free speech has enabled the workers to reason out with their employers and devise strategies that lead to effectiveness in the production. They have also been able to table their grievances and negotiate for better working deals leading to a highly motivated workforce. Business owners and employers who fail to acknowledge the importance of free speech have been faced by problems such as high employee turnover rates, riots and strikes and, a demotivated, unproductive workforce.

A family is an essential social setting, as several families constitute a community. Liberty of free speech in homes has ensured that children are open to their parents. Unlike in the old days where the relationships between parents and children were characterized by rigidity in terms of their communication. The modern-day parenting requires a person to be free with their children to ensure that they are approachable. The first people that a person interacts with immediately after gaining the ability to speak is the parents. Therefore, encouraging children to be open and free to express themselves honestly without fear of victimization in homes plays an essential role in shaping out their life. Some children come from families where they are not permitted to express themselves, and they see the parents as the ultimate authority whose decisions cannot be questioned. Consequently, even after becoming adults, they remain timid in the workplace and when dealing with those superior to them regardless of the oppression they receive.

Although freedom of speech has resulted in numerous merits, many people have misused it to cause chaos in society. Government officials, opposition leaders, and other people in power use their liberty to free speech to insight the citizens for an uprising. Many politicians have used their freedom to spread racism, tribalism, or to abuse others. Their actions have led to internal wars and racial discrimination in areas where it could be avoided. The member of the public is often inclined to their favorite politician. Therefore, in most cases, their actions are driven by the utterances made by the person. If the said leader uses his free speech liberty to insight his followers against other people, the results could be disastrous in the nation. Many countries have experienced post-election violence due to the speeches made by their leaders.

The argument made against allowing free speech is compelling, although limited in its implementation. Freedom to free speech in most cases is restricted to words that cannot insight others or interfere with other people's rights. Therefore, instead of limiting free expression due to the actions of a few misguided individuals, every person should be held liable for the outcomes of their speech. In many democratic countries where the people’s power is the supreme law, leaders have been prosecuted for inciting the citizens or spreading hate speech.

Conclusion

In conclusion, although the liberty to free speech has numerous advantages, its demerits cannot be ignored. Democracy has enabled people to call for accountability and transparency from the government and hold leaders accountable for the misuse of public office. It has also led to a better working environment and more robust family settings. Misuse of freedom to free speech can be attributed to many disasters, and chaos witnessed globally. Leaders have spread hate speech, tribalism, and racism, which has resulted in war. However, holding each person accountable for their words without limiting their freedom to speech can lead to more good than harm in a nation.