I feel that Szilagyi’s view is more suitable for a multi-racial country like Singapore. Freedom of speech is believed to be an essential of a democratic country. However, how practical is that? It is for us to judge. True enough that it is own basic human rights to have the freedom to say or do what we want. But, at the same time, we have to think of the consequences. We need to spare a thought for others. How will they feel and react to our irresponsible criticism. We have to be responsible for what we say and not freely express what we feel. It is selfish to challenge the law of freedom, and stirring unnecessary mixed feelings in people of other races.

Especially, in Singapore, the government always focus on racial harmony. We are a country with different religions, races and cultures. Hence, we need to be sensitive to others’ feelings and not freely express our point, in turn hurting others. Freedom of speech is what we commonly hear. But why do we not voice out some negative opinions that we have on our friends but instead keep it to ourselves? It is a way of communicating with others better. It is to be socially responsible and not hurt or harm others by being irresponsible and speaking bad of others. This way, there will be more peace and stability in a country. From the 1960s racial riots, we’ve seen for ourselves how vulnerable we are to racial conflicts due to the presence of different races, we have to be tactful in what we want to say and be sensitive to others’ feelings.