Free speech and democracy

Question:  A question about free speech. For example, free speech has recently been limited in Turkey by Erdogan because a German poet wrote an insulting poem about him. You said, if you know something, you have responsibility to speak. What does Saint Germain have to say about it?

This answer was given by the Ascended Master Saint Germain through Kim Michaels at a conference in Holland, 2016.

Well free speech is a very, very challenging issue. I am actually happy to leave it somewhat challenging because different nations need to approach this differently according to their stage of development.

It is clear that what is happening in Turkey is actually a backwards step for the Turkish nation. The way some of the European nations have responded to this is not the highest possible response. It is, of course, also true that when you have the freedom to say anything you want, you need to be responsible for what you are saying. That is why it is not, in the long run, a healthy development that so many people can express themselves anonymously on the Internet. It does not help them grow. It actually only gets them further and further into a downward spiral of negativity because there is nothing that challenges their negativity.

It is clear that free speech is under responsibility. You are responsible for what you are saying. Now, on the other hand, it also needs to said that when you put yourself out in public view, you cannot be sensitive to what people say about you. You have to be thick-skinned and not easily insulted. You certainly cannot adopt the attitude that, because you are the supposedly democratically elected leader of a nation, people cannot say whatever they want about you. There comes a point where, if you reach a position like that, you need to have enough largesse that you can simply say: “Well, that person may have said something about me that was highly insulting, but I choose not to be insulted because I realize that in saying it, the person has actually said more about himself than about me.”

It is clear that what the particular German poet expressed was, quite frankly, a very low level of consciousness and a very low level of intelligence. In a sense, you could say, should that be covered by free speech? Should people be able to hurl insults indiscriminately at each other as they often do on the Internet? Therefore, it is an issue to debate. Where does a nation draw that line?

You have also seen in some nations, where there are politicians who have, for example, created a Facebook page and they get such hateful responses from people that they basically decide either that they do not want to have a Facebook page, or that they do not even want to be politicians. You can have a situation where free speech has been taken to the point that it is a free-for-all to hurl insults at anybody that stands out in the public, and therefore nobody actually wants to hold any kind of public position.

Of course, as is always the case, what we would like to see – and certainly what we will see in the Golden Age – is that politicians are sensitive to the Ascended Masters and the ideas we are bringing forth. Even if they do not recognize our presence, our existence, they are sensitive to receiving ideas. But you have to be realistic and say that for some time, it will be so that people who are sensitive above will also be sensitive to what is happening below. You are sensitive vertically to the masters and their ideas, but you are also sensitive horizontally to peoples’ reactions.

Therefore, we do not want to see a situation where people do not even want to seek public office because they know they are sensitive and they know they will not be able to handle the hateful reaction they get from people. Is there one solution to this problem? No. It is a process that will take time, and different nations need to work it out in different ways.

In a sense, you can say that the solution chosen by Germany is a fair way to let the system work. Who says that the person will be convicted? But there is, in a sense, nothing wrong with letting it be tried in the court system, which in Germany is independent of the Chancellor’s office, and so the process might work and produce something that brings the nation forward. In Turkey, of course, there is not enough independence and therefore the process could not work.

On the one hand, I am balancing the view so that I do not want free speech to be a situation where anybody is free to insult anybody without having any responsibility. On the other hand it is clear that you do not have free speech in Turkey at the moment, and this is seen by how the Erdoğan government is taking over media outlet after media outlet and intimidating those who have not been taken over. Just as Putin has done and is doing in Russia, as they are doing in China, as they are doing in many Arab nations, and in other nations around the world.

This is not free speech and this is not a situation that will stand in the Golden Age. Turkey, in its present condition, cannot move into the Golden Age consciousness, and it is a very undecided question whether Erdoğan is the kind of leader who can bring the Turkish nation closer to the Golden Age consciousness, or is actually going to take Turkey into a downward spiral as he has already started to do.



Copyright © 2016 Kim Michaels