“Every human being has the right for freedom of expression without transgression on the rights of others. Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.”
From the Universal Declaration of Human Values by Wissam Charafeddine
These freedoms have deep historical roots. From Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire to the American and French revolutions, the right to express ideas and organize peacefully has been seen as essential to justice and social progress. After the horrors of World War II, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) formally recognized these rights as fundamental to global peace and human dignity. Thinkers like John Stuart Mill, Hannah Arendt, and Amartya Sen have all argued that expression and association are necessary for truth, civic engagement, and human development. Freedom of expression and peaceful assembly are the cornerstones of any society that seeks truth, justice, and progress. Article 3 of the Universal Declaration of Human Values declares that every individual has the right to express themselves and to gather peacefully with others—so long as this expression does not infringe on the rights of others. But in today’s world, the boundaries of this right are increasingly contested.
We are witnessing a dangerous inflation in what is considered “hate speech.” While true hate— such as antisemitism, islamophobia, or transphobia that has incited real-world violence—is sometimes tolerated in the halls of government and media, legitimate political speech—such as saying Free Palestine which is a cry for liberation, justice, and the dignity of a displaced people – is often smeared, suppressed, or even criminalized. This distortion of the term “harm” threatens the very foundation of democratic discourse. We must recognize that the right to speak freely must outweigh the discomfort it may cause, especially when that discomfort comes from challenging injustice, power, or the political status quo.
It is critical to distinguish between criticizing ideas and demeaning people. Ideas are not people. Critique—even ridicule—of ideologies, philosophies, or religions must remain protected speech. What should never be tolerated, however, is the dehumanization or violation of individuals’ dignity based on who they are. I was able to publish my latest Arabic book, A Discussion – Universe from Void, which critiques classical arguments for the existence of God and proposes a new alternative arguments. It is a bold exploration of a sensitive subject—one that could not be published freely in many countries around the world. My ability to write it, and your ability to read it, are freedoms we must fiercely protect. Not just for ourselves—but for future generations who must be allowed to think, question, and speak without fear.
Speech should not be censored merely because it offends or challenges dominant power structures. While we must condemn real and substantial incitement to violence, we should err on the side of freedom—not fear. The moment we begin outlawing words for making others “uncomfortable,” we open the door to authoritarianism cloaked in the language of safety. We should not mask “suppressed speech zones” as “safe zones”. Dialogue happens to remove discomfort by communicating perspectives. History, from Voltaire to Dr. King to Edward Said, teaches us that truth is often uncomfortable. And justice often begins with a voice that refuses to be silenced.
Wissam Charafeddine 