If we find 'bittersweet ironies' in Milton's qualified defence of free speech, does that not mean that we think he ought to defend free speech without qualifications?

 

It strikes me as breathtakingly naive to imagine that giving up the right to speak freely means that the government official who controls what may or may not be said will do it in favour of minorities?

 

Isn't it just, if not more likely that governments will use the restrictions on free speech to restrict minority opinion? Unless you are confident against all experience that you can control the censor, then it would make more sense to have no censorship.

 

It is all a question of who you trust, your fellow citizens, or the

state. I go with the citizens.

 

And in any event, how can we expect people to move from a prejudiced to an enlightened view if we forbid them from saying what they think. You cannot coerce people into changing their minds, you have to persuade.

 

Make the state the judge of what is best and you make us all into

babies.

 

James