Quora Answer: How Much Freedom of Speech Do Singaporeans Have?

The following is my answer to a Quora question: “How much freedom of speech do Singaporeans have?” 

How do we quantify this?  Any number or measure we give is entirely arbitrary and meaningless.  Singaporeans have freedom of speech.  That is not a contention.  The contentions pertain to the limits of those freedoms, and those constraints are entirely reasonable. 

For example, I could state that I believe the Prime Minister is less than competent, and I severely disagree with a certain policy.  That is fair criticism.  I could state that the Prime Minister is an idiot, and I hate his hair style.  That is a personal attack, but he is a public figure, and is fair game.  It does not reflect well on me, however.  However, if I were to put it in the public sphere, that he is corrupt, or to allude or imply that he took bribes, or gained an unfair monetary advantage in any manner, that is where that freedom of speech ends, since it impinges on the integrity of the government, and besmirches his character without evidence.  This is where I am open to legal action. 

In the same manner, criticism of religion and race, in a prejudicial manner, without merit or basis, is seditious, since it is a threat to the social fabric of the nation.  There is responsibility for speech, and it has to be weighed against freedom of speech.  In the US, for example, the emphasis is on absolute freedom of speech, and that is not helpful.  It breeds a culture of racial, and religious prejudice, that facilitates extremism, institutionalised discrimination, and populism.  The sort of nonsense American politicians say about ethnic, and religious groups, would put them in jail here.  In Singapore, the emphasis is on responsible speech. 

This does not mean we cannot criticise the government, or each other.  It means criticism has to be weighed in a constructive manner, in a coherent, cogent argument stating exactly what it being criticised, and why.  It is perfectly reasonable, for example, to state that I have some scepticism on the CPF, and how it is utilised to subsidise government borrowing with little transparency.  I have made no accusations or insinuations.  I have stated a fact, and an opinion based on that fact.  It would be an entire matter if I were to take that leap of logic and state that the CPF is being looted, and the current administration is profiting off it, at our expense.  That accusation is baseless, and seditious.  There is no proof of that whatsoever. 

When people understand the issues, and know what they are talking about, Singapore has freedom of speech.  When people are stupid and emotive, they will complain that they have no freedom of speech.  Freedom of speech is not freedom to say stupid, emotional things.