Testing the invitation to 'speak freely'

When someone high up in the circles of power tells the rest of us to speak freely, even when doing so means being critical of those high up in the circles of power, we can glean either of two things. One, we could read the observation, 'The biggest test of democracy is that the king is able to tolerate the strongest opinion against him and introspect,' as the proverbial cheese block that gets the gullible citizen-mouse to come out of its living room-hole because it has taken the invitation to candour at face value. The fact that we are even airing and sharing this as a possible tactic is, by itself, a critical opinion being shared freely with the understanding and hope that we are not going to be transported to the gulag. Yes, this is the kind of approach that both historians and paranoids call SFT - a Stalinist Freedom Trap.

The other analysis of such an invitation - nay, call of democratic duty - to speak without fear and frankly is that it's exactly what is being meant. 'At present, our country is facing a problem not about differences of opinion but the lack of it. If thinkers, philosophers and writers feel that their views are in the interest of the country and society, they should voice them.' With due respect, we think this is utter rubbish. So, the question is whether our different opinion will now get us in trouble or not.