In 1906, the Nobel Prize in Medicine was awarded jointly to the Italian Camilo Golgi and the Spaniard Ramon Cayal. The ceremony includes a lecture, so in this case there were two lectures in succession. The Spaniard spoke first, and after him the Italian took the floor: “My esteemed colleague is wrong…” he began, completely demolishing Cayla’s thesis.
Nowadays, one would shout that this proves that science is a fraud when even scientists can’t agree. But at the height of European thought, this was the strength of science. It was a place where competing theories could be compared (within the rules, of course). Disagreement was accepted as normal, and certainly did not mean exclusion from society. On the contrary, people with unusual theories were welcomed.
That today’s liberal oligarchy regards freedom of speech as some kind of insidious communist-fascist invention is something we have become accustomed to. But how far the destruction has progressed was even more evident at the recent Freedom of Expression Awards. Even the Liberty Society has forgotten that dissent can be normal. All the awards were given for someone publicly expressing views with which the members of the jury agree. The award winners are generally likeable people, and many of them say reasonable things that one can agree with.
But how does this relate to freedom of speech? Why was the owner of a television station, for example, who gives space on her platform to all kinds of opinions, including completely opposing ones, not awarded? Or someone who helped break through censorship even for an opinion with which they disagree. Because everyone wants freedom of speech for themselves and their opinions, not for opposing opinions.
In short, freedom of speech is not just a political issue, but a question of education and intellect. It can hardly be fought for by someone who does not know what it is. There was a time when Europeans understood it. And perhaps such times will come again.