Why would the world’s most free and successful nations want to emulate the places people are desperate to flee?
We live in a cynical era.
Even so, it is essential to understand how special the ‘free world’ really is.
Despite all the challenges facing the free nations of the Western world, there is a reason people are clamouring to live here.
When we take in the whole scope of human history, there is just a sliver of time in which people could speak, vote, and live freely and just a portion of the world in which they could do so. So, we are lucky to live in that sliver of time and in that portion of the world.
But nothing lasts forever.
Land doesn’t have magical powers that transfer values automatically. What really matters is what is in the hearts and minds of the citizens of a nation. Consider Germany in the 20th Century. It was a nation full of culture, debate, and scientific discovery, only to become a genocidal fascist regime, before being defeated and becoming a free and prosperous nation where human rights are respected.
We see the same when we go much further back in history. The city of Baghdad in present-day Iraq was once considered the intellectual centre of the world. The land is the same, but the ideas are different, and Iraq – along with much of the rest of the region – became one of the most dangerous and dysfunctional places on Earth.
Of course, this is both disturbing and hopeful.
It is disturbing because it means we can never assume that a free and advanced society will stay that way.
Hopeful, because it means that even a brutal descent into tyranny and superstition can be reversed.
Given that we currently live in relative freedom, we need to always be on guard for ideas that could reshape our society into an unfree place.
And one of those ideas is ‘blasphemy laws’:
An MP in the United Kingdom – MP Tahir Ali – is pushing for legislation that would be in essence a ‘blasphemy law’:
“Will the prime minister commit to introducing measures to prohibit the desecration of all religious texts and the prophets of the Abrahamic religions?”
First of all, the fact that only “Abrahamic religions” are mentioned gives away the game here. Why wouldn’t Hindus or Buddhists be covered?
Second of all, even if all religions were covered that wouldn’t make the proposal a better idea.
The idea of making it illegal to ‘desecrate’ religious texts is directly at odds with freedom of speech and with the emphasis on rationality and open debate that has helped to power much of the success of the free world.
The kind of countries that have blasphemy laws also tend to be the kinds of countries that people try to flee.
Why would free nations want to embrace anti-freedom ideas?
Of course, those anti-freedom ideas are often promoted in a sneaky manner.
In authoritarian states, people are told they can’t criticize the leader in order to maintain ‘respect for the nation.’
In theocracies, people are told they can’t criticize religious ideas to maintain ‘respect for faith.’
In Communist states, people are told they can’t criticize the party to maintain ‘respect for the people.’
But in all those cases, the real goal is to maintain control.
The free world is free precisely because our people are free from that kind of control. But we are only free from that kind of control because people want to be free. If our minds change, if we embrace destructive ideas, then we won’t be saved by the land that we live on or the name of the country we reside in.
Unfortunately, there is growing evidence we are heading in that direction.
Many of the worst ideas are surging in free nations, putting our freedom at risk.
Radical Islamists are allying with antisemites on the far left and far right to make our nations unsafe for Jewish People.
Many have been manipulated by propaganda from Communist China.
Many – including those who see themselves as ‘patriots’ – have been manipulated by Russian propaganda and now work against the interests of their own nation and allied nations.
And – as we saw above – there is a renewed push for laws that would steal our freedom of speech and deprive us of the right to criticize religious ideas.
Keep in mind, that there is a big difference between discriminating against someone for the faith and having the right to criticize religious ideas themselves.
It should absolutely be illegal to refuse to hire someone because of their faith. If – for example – someone fired an employee because they were Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, or an atheist, that would be discrimination and society should ensure that doesn’t happen.
At the same time, however, we must be free to criticize Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, atheism, and any other faith or idea.
Without being able to criticize, we can’t learn, we can’t grow, and we can’t advance, and that’s again why it’s no coincidence that the countries that encourage open debate are the countries that – in the long run – tend to enjoy the highest standard of living.
All of this is to say that the free world is something deeply special, and we must never make the mistake of taking that for granted. We have to continue to work for it and continue defending it, which means maintaining consistent vigilance.
Spencer Fernando
Photo – Twitter
https://spencerfernando.com/2024/11/29/blasphemy-laws-have-no-place-in-the-free-world/
