Mohammed Younus
Freedom of speech has once again got the prominence globally ever since some alleged 'terrorists' have carried out a daring attack on a satirical tabloid of France Charlie Hebdo recently, though many questions have been raising on the authenticity of the claims of French agencies about the identity of attackers.
Let me put the discussion on the identity of attackers off and express few words pertaining to the freedom of expression. Some of the experts dealing with the social rights of people across the globe compare Freedom of speech with right to live.
Snatching away this freedom would be like killing a person or a group of person, according to these experts. I also support this idea to a larger extent. But as we travel from Japan, one tip of the global map, to Europe and then US we can find different standards of freedom. In China the people are allowed to speak what the government wants them to speak. In Russia we have almost the same standards.
Coming to India we have a larger freedom but this is used only to benefit few 'strong' people. It has been observed that freedom of speech in India has got many different faces. In the name of freedom you cannot go to extreme. In India we have certain restrictions. Some lines have been drawn.
In Arabian countries, Gulf and Iran we have more restrictions on free speech. Despite such sanctions the social media has played a vital role in devastating the status quo that has been there for several decades and it brought the people there some respite from the dictatorship.
In Europe and US the freedom of speech is limitless or extreme. Generally the West including the media uses this freedom across the globe. As the west has its own standards for freedom it goes wrong in Asian, Central Asian and Latin American countries if practiced with the same standards.
Charlie Hebdo episode is the clear example of miscarriage of freedom of speech across the globe. Though it is true that if something is sacred for someone it could not be possible sacred for others but there is a need to have an overlook on the whole concept of freedom. Because we have to reconcile for peaceful co existence rather to fend conflict in the name of Freedom.
Freedom of speech has once again got the prominence globally ever since some alleged 'terrorists' have carried out a daring attack on a satirical tabloid of France Charlie Hebdo recently, though many questions have been raising on the authenticity of the claims of French agencies about the identity of attackers.
Let me put the discussion on the identity of attackers off and express few words pertaining to the freedom of expression. Some of the experts dealing with the social rights of people across the globe compare Freedom of speech with right to live.
Snatching away this freedom would be like killing a person or a group of person, according to these experts. I also support this idea to a larger extent. But as we travel from Japan, one tip of the global map, to Europe and then US we can find different standards of freedom. In China the people are allowed to speak what the government wants them to speak. In Russia we have almost the same standards.
Coming to India we have a larger freedom but this is used only to benefit few 'strong' people. It has been observed that freedom of speech in India has got many different faces. In the name of freedom you cannot go to extreme. In India we have certain restrictions. Some lines have been drawn.
In Arabian countries, Gulf and Iran we have more restrictions on free speech. Despite such sanctions the social media has played a vital role in devastating the status quo that has been there for several decades and it brought the people there some respite from the dictatorship.
In Europe and US the freedom of speech is limitless or extreme. Generally the West including the media uses this freedom across the globe. As the west has its own standards for freedom it goes wrong in Asian, Central Asian and Latin American countries if practiced with the same standards.
Charlie Hebdo episode is the clear example of miscarriage of freedom of speech across the globe. Though it is true that if something is sacred for someone it could not be possible sacred for others but there is a need to have an overlook on the whole concept of freedom. Because we have to reconcile for peaceful co existence rather to fend conflict in the name of Freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment