The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech is Everything

Written by Eric Heinze

Narrated by Julian Elfer

What are human rights? Are they laid out definitively in the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights or the US Bill of Rights? Are they items on a checklist—dignity, justice, progress, standard of living, health care, housing? In
The Most Human Right, Eric Heinze explains why global human rights systems have failed. International organizations constantly report on how governments manage human goods, such as fair trials, humane conditions of detention, health
care, or housing. But to appease autocratic regimes, experts have ignored the primacy of free speech. Heinze argues that goods become rights only when citizens can claim them publicly and fearlessly: free speech is the fundamental
right, without which the very concept of a “right” makes no sense.

Heinze argues that throughout history countless systems of justice have promised human goods. What, then, makes human rights different? What must human rights have that other systems have lacked? Heinze revisits the origins of the
concept, exploring what it means for a nation to protect human rights, and what a citizen needs in order to pursue them. He explains how free speech distinguishes human rights from other ideas about justice, past and present.

• Language: English
• Publisher: Recorded Books, Inc.
• Release date: May 3, 2022
• ISBN: 9781705061176

Reviews for The Most Human Right

[pomo58 · Rating: 5 out of 5 stars]

The Most Human Right: Why Free Speech Is Everything by Eric Heinze is a detailed but argument for the primacy of what is commonly referred to as free speech. I was torn between four and five stars but went with five because I think the book is written so those with no foundation beyond the popular arguments about free speech can understand the background and basic distinctions Heinze is using in making his case. As such, I think it succeeds quite well. If parts of the book seem basic to you, they are still important to make sure you are understanding his argument on his terms, after which you can make any other case you may want.I seem to remember from an earlier piece from Heinze that the distinction was between free speech absolutism and viewpoint absolutism. To make the terminology more readily understandable I like his adoption of content-based and viewpoint-based as the distinguishing factors of the free speech public debate. The need for viewpoint-based absolutism or near-absolutism is shown, through theoretical concepts and practical examples, as necessary, though not sufficient, for other human goods (commonly called human rights) to even be possible.The overall argument seems like it should be agreeable to most, though it is in the details where debate usually arises. No matter what human goods are "guaranteed" as rights within state apparatus, if every single citizen doesn't feel able to safely and effectively speak out and advocate then those human goods have not truly become human rights. It is the ability to speak freely, with certain limitations, mostly content-based, and having a voice in making decisions, not just offering opinions about decisions, that allow human goods to become human rights.I would recommend this to anyone interested in thinking in a more nuanced manner about free speech and human rights. It is not a difficult read so much as it is a read that requires you to pay attention to what words are being used, by whom, and what they might mean in practice as well as theory. In other words, it is an accessible work for those who don't mind working to grasp new perspectives on commonly (mis)used concepts.Reviewed from a copy made available by the publisher via NetGalley.