The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1934-02-17
Liberal Viewpoint
by DIR. HARRY ELMER BARNES;

THERE seems to be a renewed interest in the
Il freedom Of speech, press and assembly. The
controversy over drug advertising, the press
code, suppression of Nazi and Communist gath
erlngS and the cry that the Fascists are coming
all have promoted this newly manifested con-
Germ.
To many, just now, it appears more impor-
tant to be free to eat than it does to be free to
talk, write or gather with our fellows about a
soap box But these ancient traditions of liberty
must not be wholly obscured by current eco
nomic distress.
Therefore, we may welcome a realistic dis
cussion OF this question by the American
writer who Is far and away, best qualified to
deal with the subject, Professor Carl Becker of
cornell university. His article on Freedom of
Speech" in the Nation is the best brief COM
mentary on the topic which have ever read.
Professor Becker does well to make it clear
that freedom Of speech is no gift from the gods
which will survive in spite of any and all types
OF human folly. 1t was slowly worked out as a
result OF prolonged human struggle. More than
W per cent of the period Of human life on this
earth has passed before there was the SLIGHTEST
amount of freedom of speech, written word or
public proclamation
Whatever may be the virtue of freedom of
speech in the abstract world of ideas. as a. rule
OF political action it is like any other law it
WORKS well only If the conditions are favorable.
T works not too badly in society in which
the material conditions of life. being rela
tVely easy, create no radical conflicts of interest
and in which there exists common ira
dltlon or moral and social ideas one of which
IS That just government rests upon the consent
freely expressed and freely given, of the gov
erned
"A longtime view Of human civilization ois-
closes the fact that such favorable conditions
nave existed only in a few places and for short
times. Experience gives us slight ground for
Supposing that nineteenth century liberal
democracy is permanent conquest of intelli-
gence.
1T may very we'll be but a passing phase, a
cumbersome and extravagant form Of govern
ment, practicable only in relatively simple agri-
cultural societies suddenly lowered with unac-
cuStomed wealth by the discovery of new
instruments of power and the inventions of new
machines"
'The present conception of freedom Of speech
arose in the late seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, when the intellectuals conceived of
society and government as a sort of rational
debating club:
Its validity, for those who formulated It,
rested upon presuppoSitions which may be put
in the form of a syllogiSn:
Major premise: The sole method of arriv-
ing at truth is the application Of human reason
to the problems presented by the universe and
the life Of men in it.
Minor premise: Men are rational creatures
who can easily grasp and will gladly accept the
truth once it is disclosed to them
"CONCLUSION: BY allowing men freedom OF
~ speech and the press, relevant knowledge
will be made accessible, untrammeled discus
sion will reconcile divergent interest and opin-
ions and laws acceptable to all will be enacted.
I'VE have had about two centuries OF expert
ence since those days and have gained greatly
in our knowledge of man and society. The minor
premise underlying freedom of speech has been
proved completely false and the conclusion has
not been indicated by experience.
ut now is perfectly apparent that eighteenth
century ideals and remedies will not suffice in
the second third of the twentieth century. Eco
nomic individualism and liberty have brought
to us, in the end, widespread misery and eco
nomic collapse
1.-The principle of free speech must justify
itself or go under. The real danger, from the
liberal point of view, is not that Nazis and
Communists will destroy liberal democracy by
free speaking, but that liberal democracy,
through its own failure to cure social ills, will
destroy itself by breeding Nazis and Com
munistS. If liberal democracy sufficiently can
alleviate social ills, freedom of speech win have
sufficiently justified itself: II not, freedom of
speech win in any case be lost Ia the shuttle.