Application Question

Singer believes that freedom of expression is essential to any democracy and therefore should not be limited. On the other hand, Szilagyi believes that more focus should be placed on social responsibility.
In the context of Singapore's multi-racial society, where there is cultural and religious pluralism, which author's view do you think should be adpoted?

I think that Szilagyi's view should be adopted. In such a multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society as Singapore, freedom of expression must be limited in order to ensure the strong existence of racial harmony.

As Szilagyi states in his article, "In our networked world, existing societal and political tensions can be inflamed instantly through the transfer of messages from one cultural context to another." and that " once messages are out in public, they develop a life of their own and become subject to multiple interpretations." The example he gave was the publishing of Prophet Muhammad"s cartoons.

I agree with Szilagyi. Especially so in Singapore, messages can be interpreted differently by different racial groups. A message may be seen as an offensive statement even though no such motives were present by the writer. This may spark off unwanted tensions and even fights among racial groups like the 1964 racial riots. Moreover, in Singapore where there are clear laws banning racial discrimination, there are already a few cases of public racism which caused the unhappiness of many people. If such situations are happening at present, what more is there to come if freedom of expression is not limited at all?

Although Singer argues in paragraph 8 that "freedom of speech is essential to democratic regimes" as "without that freedom, human progress will always run up against a basic roadblock", Singapore as an example is a clear rebuttal to his claim. Singapore's law at present limits the freedom of expression. However, our counrty has been and is still progressing at an accelerating speed. This is beacuse Singapore focuses on protecting the collective interests of our society more than ensuring everyone has a free say in everything.(as mentioned in Szilagyi's article). Only when there is the people's interests are placed at priority, will there be happiness and stability in the country, which ultimately leads to progress.

In conclusion, my opinion is that more focus should be placed on social responsibility. Complete freedom of expression is sure to be misused and should not be implemented. Therefore, Szilagyi's view should be adopted.