Free Speech
In today’s climate, the concept of free speech is often used not to facilitate dialogue but to suppress it. Paradoxically, those with the largest platforms now cry censorship to deflect critique, casting themselves as victims when faced with accountability. “Cancel culture” is invoked not to protect discourse but to dismiss challenges, especially when those challenges come from individuals who have historically been denied a voice.
This rhetorical sleight of hand, where the powerful claim to be persecuted, distorts the very principles it purports to defend. Those called out for hate speech or misinformation often reframe that feedback as an attack on their rights and weaponise free expression to avoid reflection. In doing so, they cast a legitimate response as oppression, marginalising once again the voices that dare to speak truth to power.
What Free Speech Means
As psychotherapists, we don’t work in courts or comment sections. We work in rooms designed for listening. In these spaces, we pay attention not only to what is said, but also to why it is said, how it is said, and what occurs in the saying. In our view, free speech is not merely a legal entitlement; it is a relational act — one shaped by personal history, emotional context, and cultural power.
To speak freely — to tell the truth of one’s experience — is an act of vulnerability. For many clients, this is the core labour of therapy. That voice may have been shaped by trauma, inhibited by shame, or distorted by early relational patterns. To give voice to something real, to be met without defence or dismissal, is not a small matter. It is a human need — and a psychological risk.
Similarly, learning to listen, especially to differences, often presents a greater challenge. It demands maturity, humility, and the ability to remain present despite discomfort.
The Myth of Speech Without Consequence
In therapy, words are never neutral. They exist in a context of meaning, memory, and feeling. A client who lashes out in rage cannot simply say, “I was being honest,” as if honesty absolves them of responsibility. Speech has tone. It has intent. It has consequences. It is part of being in a relationship.
The public narrative around “cancel culture” often fails to grasp this. What is frequently described as censorship is, in fact, relational feedback. You speak — and others respond. If your words cause harm and you refuse to recognise that harm, you may face consequences. That is not silencing; it is a boundary.
To demand speech without consequence is to desire a relationship without accountability — something therapy, gently yet firmly, disallows.
Right Speech: A Buddhist Perspective
The Buddha placed profound importance on how we speak. In the Noble Eightfold Path, Right Speech (samma-vaca) is not about what we’re allowed to say — it is about how speech can serve awakening. Traditionally, it is defined as:
Truthful – not deceitful
Kind – not harsh
Helpful – not harmful
Timely – appropriate to context
This is not moralism; it is a psychology of relationship. The Buddha knew that words could be as wounding as fists. Harsh speech hardens the heart. Gossip corrodes trust. Lies fracture reality. In contrast, Right Speech liberates us from the compulsion to dominate or perform. It asks us to speak from presence rather than defence, from wisdom rather than reactivity.
Power and the Right to Be Heard
One of the essential insights of psychotherapy — and Buddhist social ethics — is that not all speech is equal. Just as some inner voices dominate while others are suppressed, in the broader world, some people are given platforms, while others are ignored or discredited.
The idea of “free speech” as a universal value assumes a level playing field that doesn’t exist. In truth, some voices come at a significant cost. Some speech — often shielded by abstract principle — does real harm. To pretend otherwise is neither noble nor noble; it is either naïve or wilfully blind.
The Therapy Room as a Speech Space
A good therapy room is not a space for unfiltered expression. It is a container—shaped by confidentiality, boundaries, and respect—where speech is slowed down, reflected upon, and received with care.
We ask: What am I saying? What am I avoiding? What is the impact of these words on me, on the other? These questions are not restrictions on freedom; they are the preconditions for truth. Without them, speech becomes performance, defence, or aggression.
Could we envision public discourse in similar terms? Rather than insisting on limitless freedom, could we inquire: What conditions make meaningful speech and deep listening possible?
From Free Speech to Wise Speech
In therapy, as in Dharma, the goal is not only to express ourselves but also to know ourselves. We transition from reaction to response, from defence to dialogue, and from ego to relationship.
This signifies the movement of wise speech. It does not imply silence or suppression. It embodies courage. It involves asking: What is true? What is kind? What is needed here?
Wise speech may be bold, yet it is never cruel. It can disrupt, but it does not humiliate. It does not seek ego gratification, but rather mutual understanding and ultimately, healing.
The New Road Psychotherapy Approach
At New Road Psychotherapy, we recognise that we live in an era of increasing social, political, and cultural polarisation. Questions of identity, belief, and belonging are charged, not only in society but also in the consulting room.
Our response is not to retreat into ideological purity or silence, but to carefully hold the tension. The following commitments shape our values:
1. Free Expression Rooted in Relational Ethics
We honour the need to speak freely, especially about what is difficult. But we also recognise that words carry weight. Freedom of expression here is not a licence to diminish, but an invitation to relate with curiosity, care, and courage.
2. Inclusion Without Ideological Conformity
We support those who have been historically marginalised — including LGBTQ+ individuals, people of colour, disabled persons, and others — while refusing to impose ideological conformity. Instead, we foster a pluralistic and reflective culture in which differences can be explored, rather than erased.
3. Differentiating Between Discomfort and Harm
Discomfort is often a necessary part of therapy; it may signal the truth or foster growth. Harm, by contrast, involves humiliation or domination. We aim to explore differences without shame and to address ruptures within a relational frame.
4. Ongoing Reflection and Supervision
We do not expect ourselves to be free from bias. However, we do expect a willingness to explore it. Supervision becomes a space not for judgment, but for growth.
5. Dialogue Over Dogma
We value dialogue over silence and relationships over rigid positions. We offer CPD sessions, facilitate challenging conversations, and cultivate a climate of humility, kindness, and active listening.
Final Words
The public conversation around free speech is often loud and polarised. However, beneath the slogans lies a deeper question: What does it mean to speak — and be heard — in a way that heals rather than harms?
Psychotherapy teaches us that speech is not separate from relationships; it is, in fact, a relationship. It can rupture and repair. In a world of performative outrage and polarisation, what we need most is not more noise but more discernment. Not louder speech, but deeper listening.
If we want a culture where everyone can speak and be heard, we must go beyond legal rights to ethical responsibility. And perhaps — as therapy does — we begin not with slogans, but with silence, with presence, and with a shared willingness to meet one another, word by word.
Rory Singer