Imagine a world where free speech is punished and questioning the authority is forbidden. This sounds like fiction, but it’s reality for some people in democracies today. You might expect democratic countries to protect free speech and open debate, but there seems to be a concerning trend. Is criticism becoming less tolerated in democracies worldwide? The answer is complex.
The Golden Age of Debate: Was It Ever That Golden?
Democracies have long prided themselves on being spaces where ideas clash in the open. Although the ancient Athens was not perfect by any stretch, the citizens there could argue about governance without fear of a spear in the back. Fast forward to the 18th century, and you’ve got the likes of Voltaire in France, who declared, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” That spirit carried into the early days of modern democracies. In the United States, the First Amendment was etched into the Constitution in 1791, promising free speech as a bedrock principle. Criticism of the government wasn’t just tolerated—it was encouraged.
Even in early times, democracy had flaws. For example, the 1798 Sedition Act in the U.S. banned publishing negative content about the government. People who criticised President Adams faced legal punishment. So intolerance of criticism has always existed in democracies. The real question is whether it’s becoming more common now.
The 20th Century: Progress and Pushback
In the 20th century, democracy spread worldwide. After World War II, it grew in Western Europe and parts of Asia. Free speech appeared to triumph. During the 1960s in America, the Civil Rights Movement openly criticised systemic racism through protests, speeches, and marches. While the government didn’t always approve, critics could still speak out—though the FBI monitored Martin Luther King Jr.
After World War II, Britain rebuilt itself as a democracy with a free press. Though libel laws existed, journalists could criticise politicians without facing imprisonment. Even in newer democracies like India (independent in 1947), the constitution protected free speech. India’s first prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, stated he preferred “a completely free press with all the dangers involved” over “a suppressed or regulated press.” These were admirable principles.
But cracks were already forming. In the U.S., the McCarthy era of the 1950s saw dissenters branded as communists and blacklisted. In France, the government censored criticism during the Algerian War in the late 1950s and early 1960s, and jailed writers who spoke out. Intolerance wasn’t the norm, but it wasn’t rare either. It simmered beneath the surface, flaring up when power felt threatened.
The 21st Century: A Shift in the Air
Now let’s fast-forward to 2025. The world’s changed a lot since Nehru’s time, and not always for the better. There’s a growing sense that democracies are getting prickly about criticism.
Take the United States, the self-proclaimed land of the free. The January 6, 2021 Capitol riot revealed deeper issues. After losing the 2020 election, Trump and his supporters claimed fraud without evidence. Critics who challenged this faced death threats, doxing (public exposure of personal information without consent), and harassment. A 2022 report found 57% of white Americans still believed in voter fraud claims, fuelled by disinformation that rejected opposing views. The message was obvious: disagree and become an enemy. During Trump’s second term, conditions have deteriorated for minorities.
In India, once considered a model liberal democracy, Prime Minister Modi’s government has restricted dissent in ways that would disappoint Nehru. For example, 22-year-old climate activist Disha Ravi was arrested in 2021 for sharing a Google Doc supporting farmers’ protests. She was charged with “sedition,” a colonial-era law now used against critics. A 2023 Freedom House report downgraded India from “Free” to “Partly Free,” citing journalist and activist intimidation. Intolerance isn’t just emerging—it’s rapidly growing.
Over in Europe, Hungary’s a case study in democratic backsliding. Since Viktor Orbán took power in 2010, he’s overhauled the country’s laws to muzzle critics. Independent media outlets have been bought up by government allies, and a 2020 law lets the state declare a “state of danger” to bypass parliament. Critics like NGOs and journalists face smear campaigns or worse. Freedom House’s 2023 report gave Hungary a dismal 3 out of 10 for freedom of expression, down from 8 a decade ago. Orbán’s not hiding it—he’s proud of his “illiberal democracy.”
Legislation: The Legal Squeeze
It’s not just isolated events—laws are also restricting freedom. Australia’s 2018 Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Act seems reasonable at first: register if you represent a foreign government. However, critics argue it’s being used to suppress free speech. In 2021, academics and journalists feared they would be targeted for criticising China or other countries. The atmosphere has changed from “speak freely” to “be careful what you say.”
Poland provides another example. Since 2015, when the Law and Justice Party (PiS) took power, they’ve restricted media freedom. In 2021, they passed a law prohibiting non-European media ownership, targeting critical outlets like TVN. The government has also filled the judiciary with supporters, making it difficult to fight these changes. A 2022 European Parliament report stated that Poland’s “democratic standards are under threat,” with resistance to criticism at its centre.
Even Canada, known for being polite, shows concerning signs. The 2021 Online Harms Bill, designed to address hate speech, raised concerns about government overreach. The Canadian Civil Liberties Association warned it might “stifle legitimate expression.” Though not yet law, this debate shows how even stable democracies are considering tighter restrictions on speech.
Quotes and Reports: The Voices of Alarm
The numbers and voices back this up. Freedom House’s 2023 “Freedom in the World” report is a wake-up call. It tells us that global freedom’s declined for 17 straight years, with democracies leading the slide. They note, “Infringement on freedom of expression has long been a key driver of global democratic decline.” Media freedom scored a flat zero out of four in 33 countries, which is up from 14 countries in 2006.
Nobel-winning economist Amartya Sen stated clearly in 2021: “Democracy is not just about elections—it’s about the freedom to criticise without fear. That’s eroding, even where voting still exists.” In Turkey, which is barely democratic anymore, imprisoned journalist Ahmet Altan wrote in 2019, “They can lock me up, but they can’t lock up the truth.” His offence? Criticising President Erdoğan.
What’s Driving This?
Why is this happening? One word: insecurity. Democracies face pressures from economic inequality, populist leaders, and disinformation. When power feels threatened, it attacks critics. Social media works both ways—it spreads criticism but also lets governments track and punish it faster. A 2022 Brookings report observed: “Misinformation weakens faith in democracy, and governments respond by cracking down—not on lies, but on truth-tellers.”
Globalisation is another factor. As borders become less defined, leaders fear losing control. Hungary’s Orbán uses “foreign interference” claims to silence NGOs. India’s Modi labels activists as “anti-national” otherworldly “Urban Naxals” to justify imprisoning them. The strategy is simple: present criticism as a threat, then crush it.
Is It Really Worse?
Let’s consider another view. Perhaps we just notice intolerance more because we’re constantly connected. In the 1790s, you couldn’t share arrests instantly online. Some argue democracies are simply adjusting to new threats like terrorism or online hate. The UK’s 2000 Terrorism Act and France’s 2017 anti-terror laws restrict speech, but supporters claim they’re needed for public safety. Is this intolerance or practical adaptation?
There are also positive developments. South Korea’s 2017 impeachment of President Park Geun-hye showed that criticism can still remove powerful leaders. Tunisia’s 2011 revolution created a democracy that, despite challenges, allows more dissent than others in the region. Perhaps things aren’t entirely negative.
Conclusion
Intolerance of criticism has grown in democracies, with mounting evidence from arrests, laws, threats, and reports. While not universal or new, the trend is speeding up. From the US to India, Hungary to Poland, space for dissent is narrowing, limited by insecure leaders and nervous systems. The 20th century had censorship, but today’s tools, like digital surveillance, legal loopholes, and populist rhetoric, make suppression more effective and frightening.
Yet, this isn’t the end of democracy; it’s a test. History shows democracies can bounce back when citizens push hard enough. The Civil Rights Movement and the fall of the Berlin Wall were victories of criticism over clampdowns. The question is whether we’ve got the guts to fight for that space again. Because if we don’t, the dystopia I hooked you with? It’s not just a story, it’s a preview. Let’s not let it get that far.
#FreeSpeech #Censorship #DemocracyCrisis #GlobalFreedom #DigitalSurveillance #AuthoritarianismInDisguise
No comments:
Post a Comment