In many parts of the world, including Southeast Asia, the right to free speech—the freedom to express one’s thoughts, ideas, and opinions without fear of government retribution—is not held as a high priority. This is a stark contrast to Western nations, such as the United States, where the concept of free speech is enshrined as a fundamental human right. Why is this the case? The answer to this question lies in the historical, cultural, social and political contexts of these Southeast Asian nations.
In many Southeast Asian countries, preserving social harmony and maintaining political stability are deemed more important than protecting individual rights, including freedom of speech. Governing bodies often stress the importance of social cohesion and perpetuating shared cultural values. Policies limiting free speech are often justified based on the need to prevent racial or religious strife in these culturally diverse nations.
The colonial history and struggle for independence of many Southeast Asian nations has influenced their attitude towards free speech. Governments argue that censorship is necessary to ensure national security. They fear that uncontrolled free speech could lead to the spread of false information, incite social unrest or pose threats to the nation’s leadership.
Moreover, in these nations, it’s common for political leaders to conflate criticism with disloyalty. As a result, free speech is curtailed to protect the reputation and authority of the leadership. Oftentimes, regulatory bodies control the media, censoring content deemed a threat to the leadership or national security.
Furthermore, in some Southeast Asian societies, concepts of respect and face-saving are deeply ingrained. Openly criticising someone, especially a person in authority, is considered disrespectful. This cultural norm makes the freedom to criticize, a central aspect of free speech, challenging to implement.
In conclusion, while the right to free speech is not a priority in Southeast Asia, it is essential to highlight that it’s not due to the lack of its understanding. It’s more about the choices governments and societies make, driven by historical, political, cultural contexts and their perceptions of what is needed to achieve and maintain harmony and stability. Until these factors evolve, free speech is unlikely to gain primacy in these nations.