The First Amendment--and its guarantee of free speech for all
Americans--has been at the center of scholarly and public debate since
the birth of the Constitution, and the fervor in which intellectuals,
politicians, and ordinary citizens approach the topic shows no sign of
abating as the legal boundaries and definitions of free speech are
continually evolving and facing new challenges. Such discussions have
generally remained within the boundaries of the U.S. Constitution and
its American context, but consideration of free speech in other
industrial democracies can offer valuable insights into the relationship
between free speech and democracy on a larger and more global scale,
thereby shedding new light on some unexamined (and untested) assumptions
that underlie U.S. free speech doctrine.
Ronald J. Krotoszynski, Jr., compares the First Amendment with free
speech law in Japan, Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom--countries
that are all considered modern democracies but have radically different
understandings of what constitutes free speech. Challenging the
popular--and largely American--assertion that free speech is inherently
necessary for democracy to thrive, Krotoszynski contends that it is very
difficult to speak of free speech in universalist terms when the concept
is examined from a framework of comparative law that takes cultural
difference into full account.