The link between free speech and economic progress

Based on 'Free speech ensures economic progress' from 'The Times', 13 February 2006

In Scotland in 1696, Thomas Aikenhead, an 18 year old theology student sparked religious uproar when he said on a freezing night, “I wish right now I were in the place Ezra called hell, to warm myself”. His remark was reported and this was no laughing matter to the authorities of the Scottish church, the Kirk. The following year, Aikenhead was put to death.

The Aikenhead affair draws some striking insights into the current uproar surrounding the publication of the cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed. The 17th century incident is a reminder that Islam has no monopoly and the affair also reminds us how the beliefs a mass of the population can be exploited.

The young man’s story should have been born a few decades later and as David Hume, the Scottish philosopher put it, “It is a rare and fortunate age when you may think what you like, and can say what you think”. At this time, Scotland was in the grip of intellectual and political upheaval that would transform its economy, laying the foundations for the modern West as we know it. This great leap forward, triggered a great wave of economic and social progress giving way to, among others, Adam Smith, the father of economic thought.

The link between freedom of expression and economic progress is a neglected facet of the intense debate sparked by the Danish cartoons. It is one we should celebrate. It has been the basis of Western economic, social and scientific advancement. It has been the catalyst for the prosperity that we enjoy. In history, it is the stories of rebellion that have usually led to economic and technological progress that are a testimony to the power of free expression. But history has also shown us the power a dictatorial and authoritative regime, but the merits are temporary and is the ultimate cause of the collapse of the regime at the hands of the disaffected population.

So it is disappointing that Western nations such as the USA and our own seem to have forgotten these lessons of history and have been feeble in the defence of free speech. The cartoons may have been offensive, but free expression means that we must tolerate these statements, however misconceived. Some may think the West is being cautious and pragmatic and some may think that they should uphold these freedoms at whatever cost.

This freedom is limited because of the fear through the threats of violence that intimidate people into silence. Despite this fear, the government should defend the pillars that form the foundations of our society and to do otherwise would taunt the foundations that our society has been built on and that many have fought and died for.