I think the big unknown is how long could society carry on “perfectly well” without free speech? I would not expect Western society to crumble overnight if we were rid of free speech. However, after a decade or three we would see serious adverse consequences.
Europeans definitely have a General Ripper attitude about their precious bodily fluids. Though I’m not sure if that qualifies as a restriction against free speech. Scientists and government officials can still talk about GMOs for or against. There’s no ban against research.
I think better examples would be the bans against conspicuous religious symbols, strict hate speech laws, banning of Nazi memorabilia, and strict libel laws.
That’s banning a technology, not science. Hardly the same thing.
Left Wing?
Ha! these American companies (Who are now people by speech) are copyrighting their seeds and making farmers buy them again every freakin year.
I’m so broken up by your business toes being stubbed.
Exactly this.
And exactly this, too.
All you need to have your point of view freely expressed from coast to coast – drowning out everybody else and eventually believed from coast to coast by sheer force of repetition and marketing excellence – is the expenditure of a few hundred million dollars. Everyone with a few hundred million dollars to spare is welcome to participate in this democratic process. This is sure to promote a diversity of different viewpoints and a balanced democratic society serving everyone’s interests.
Really? Consider this. About a year ago, we learned that the Veterans Affairs Department had killed scores of veterans by denying them health care that they needed. It had also gone to great lengths to lie about the amount of time that veterans were waiting to get health care, and had done other atrocious things to amounted to avoiding its duty to provide veterans with health care.
But once the media learned the truth about this, they were free to report it, and people were free to talk about it and demand change. And eventually the outrage grew to the point where Veterans Affairs Secretary Eric Shinseki had to resign in disgrace, and others were fired as well, and changes were made. (Though it appears that the department also lied about the number of people who were fired. They said it was 60; it was actually 3. But I digress.) So the ability to speak about the government’s misdeeds was a necessary part of ending the horrible things that happened to veterans in the health care system built specifically for them.
If the government had the power to censor in this country, they might have simply outlawed any report of the truth of what was taking place in Veterans’ hospitals. Shinseki would never have been forced to resign, and the problem would never have been fixed.
So free speech is necessary for the health care system. For similar reasons, it’s necessary to make any system function well over the long term.
Much like imprisoning people for the consumption of cannabis, it would be a tremendous waste of resources policing speech.
When and if the Chinese people find their individual voices, their government will have hard decisions to make.
May Godwin forgive me, but Nazi Germany was rolling along pretty well before the unpleasantness, having virtually all the attributes mentioned in the OP. Except possibility the renewable energy part, though they did have synthetic petrol plants. And “long life expectancy” was kind of a relative thing.
Not to belabor this tangential nonsense, but American farmers can choose to buy open-pollinated crop seeds and save them from year to year indefinitely - no one is forcing them to buy hybrid seed, whether GMO or non-GMO.