According to American novelist, Jill McCorkle, “By limiting or denying freedom of speech and expression, we take away a lot of potential. We take away thoughts and ideas before they even have the opportunity to hatch. We build a world around negatives - you can't say, think, or do this or that.” In different parts of the world, the freedom of speech and press are limited and far out of reach to many human rights activists. Activists and bloggers face persecution from authorities, who take away their right to freedom of speech. First, an activist in Vietnam was physically abused, harassed, and arrested for posting what she believed was her opinion of the Vietnam law. Next, a Mauritanian blogger faced execution for “speaking lightly” …show more content…
For example, the practice of Communism focuses on the concerns of the society rather than the individual and silences the opposition that they perceive as harmful to the people. The authorities in China track and monitor the Internet to find what they believed to be threats to the public. This elimination of the threats online allows for the government to function without serious opposition and thus act more efficiently (Rubio, Smith 1). Although restricting the right to freedom of speech allows for better government control over the country, the thoughts and opinions of the people are vital for acknowledging the aspects of the government that are corrupt. Furthermore, this controlling of the way of thought diminishes the ability of the mind to think for itself, develop radical ideas, or compose great works. This extreme form of censorship and regulation inhibits the further advancement or development of society that has occurred repeatedly in history. Therefore, taking away the right to freedom of press and speech benefits the government more than the