Freedom of Speech & Expression: When is boom a bane?

heh heh, this is one of those controversial stuff again ain't it? And as a political science student (and soon to be practitioner of this black art) this is one issue that I've heard over and over (along with classics like democracy or dictatorship; agency or structure....you get the idea.) Like a lot of people I do value the freedom of expression and speech. So do many around the world. However, the question that always bugs national leaders and thinkers alike is how much is too much, is absolute too much?

But first, a little explanation...see I realised that everywhere I look on the internet people are expressing their views hidden behind anonymous nicks indiscriminately expressing their every conviction and prejudice. Inevitably when censure occurs those whom offend often decry the death of freedom of expression, and cloaking their actions behind noble ideals. Now, here's my two fingered reply to such hypocrisy (okay, now I must stress this is a personal point of view and that you are of course free to differ, but remember what I will say next before you angrily reply).

First of all, lets look at some premises of this freedom. Some see it as a right, in other societies it is more of an privilege (cultural factors apply....your town may differ from mine). Which means that this 'right' is not a natural state of being(and therefore is not to be shoved down the throats of others, just because they don't believe this doesn't make them any less human) although I will not argue that its the ideal ultimate condition of human society.

So far so good. However, as you can see in the real world, there are some problems. Some one is bound to say something that pisses people off so bad/or motivates people in a way that something may happen in the real world. Take for instance the messages that Al Qaeda posts which translates into real attacks...or the publication of the comics in Denmark that resulted in protests and violence. Therefore what I can conclude is that the freedom of expression is perhaps unrealistic due to some very fundamental flaws in our society. Therefore, whilst freedom of expression is what we aspire to, perhaps it may remain an unachieveable ideal.

Huh? Okay, the thing is to avoid those ills above, there are a few necessary condition, things like a complete education of society. Why? Because education teaches a person to think, to be rational . In this case, to be rational will bestow responsibility in our speech, the ability to exercise proper judgement in what we say and do. For example, even with things we might not agree with, we may express our difference in a logical manner that creates (hopefully) conviction of the other party

From here on, everything above goes down the drain. Here's why, despite what we'd like to think of our own superiority as human beings, we are but ruled by our emotions and prejudices (Just ask George Dubbya what he thinks of Saadam). We like to think our actions are justified when its rarely so in the absence of perfect information and in the circumstance of personal biases. Therefore, what we say or do is always shaped by illogical forces. Second, human beings thrive on emotions. What does this mean? It means that all our past glories, all our future achievements as a species is driven by emotions, the desire to suceed, the will to move on and beyond our current state of being. Therefore, as long as we remain so, we will say or do whatever we like thinking it was for the genuine advancement of the fellow man (again, ask George). As we can see so far, humans are illogical and irrational. And, freedom of speech itself requires a degree of rationality to function as it should. Plus the problem of the inability of education to be wide reaching as well as complete (we are all familiar with the failures of education so....) All this adds up to an impossible dream.