Freedom of Expression

After reading both articles on the different views on one’s freedom of speech, I have gained a deeper understanding on the authors’ perspective. In it, they had clearly explained to us about why they took that stand.
However, I feel that Singapore should adopt Zsofia Szilagyi’s view where there is more emphasis on responsibility instead of solely freedom. This is because in our small red dot, internal conflict is one of our great vulnerability if care is not taken. Here in Singapore live many people of different race, language and religion. One cannot afford to take an extremely firm stand on freedom and start doing things that they want. These things could be anything that range from things beneficial to them to things that are harmful to others. All these while, Singaporeans have been living in harmony because the people are responsible enough to spare a thought for others and accepting other race, language and religion. If total freedom takes over, those harmful actions done could be disastrous. Hurtful things said to others could lead to the rising of tension between races. The end result could be anything that you can imagine. An example of freedom of speech being abuse is the Utusan Melayu, a Malayan newspaper. At that point in time, it published an article that said bad things about the Singaporean Chinese and how the Singaporean Malays are not well taken care of when in fact it was not. This sparked off racial tension and before long the famous Singapore racial riot occurred. It affected many people’s daily lives. Furthermore, Singapore is a very small country. A riot of such scale really affects the whole nation. Unlike other big countries, such a riot might only occupy a small part of the country and thus will not be as badly affected as Singapore. From here we can see that Singapore is indeed very vulnerable to internal conflict which could be possibly caused by irresponsible freedom of speech. This is why I feel that for a multi-racial society like Singapore, the importance of being tactful and responsible certainly overwhelms the importance of freedom of speech.
No doubt I disagree to adopting freedom of expression as Singapore’s policy, it is sometimes essential for various aspects in Singapore’s society. In Mr. Peter Singer’s article, he said that this is important for democracy. With this, it helps in the sense that through freedom of expression, thoughts are conveyed across and helps to make a clear situation. Besides this, when views are expressed truthfully and openly, is allows this exchange in opinion to help improve a current situation. Views expressed for a positive purpose are beneficial so long as it is done in a tactful way. In this sense, the freedom of expression is quintessential for development and improvement.
Freedom of expression, if it is abuse, could end up drastic. Hence, it always has to be accompanied by responsibility. This power in freedom of expression allows us to do what we want. But what we had done, if not backed up by responsibility, is totally incoherent. Do you mean that if one day you are extremely frustrated with your chemistry teacher and went to set fire to the chemistry laboratory and then when questioned, deny that it was you who did it since it is “not your responsibility”? With greater power comes heavier responsibility. We have to be prepared to pay for the cost of our actions. So this is why we have to be tactful when expressing freely especially when dealing with sensitive issues so as not to cause problems. But if really want to comment a negative remark, be certain that it is brought through carefully like a discussion. It is your responsibility to ensure that it is conveyed through as a form of your thinking and not a challenge. Afterall, responsibility is a core value in life which is why I feel that Singapore should adopt Zsofia Szilagyi’s concept of responsibility over total liberty.