On Freedom, Truth, Peace, and Silence

(A reflection by Sal Godoij.)

While in freedom, we may think we’re free to denounce crime.

But we don’t do it because we want to keep living in peace, so we opt for discretion.

Therefore, if we want peace, we must silence the truths, and I say that this silence applies to any truth that exposes the distance between a society’s values and the injustices it permits or conceals.

After all, silenced truths cannot denounce crimes. Hence, we live in peace.

If so, because of our silence, or discretion, does crime become the hidden cornerstone of peace and freedom?

Can a society be peaceful because it has achieved justice, or because it has suppressed the evidence of injustice?

Are we all who enjoy freedom accomplices of crime? We may be; however, we must remember that freedom becomes complicit in crime when it protects the right to speak in theory but punishes truth-telling in practice. Likewise, peace does not require silence. A more durable peace may require truthful confrontation, public accountability, and institutions that can absorb conflict without collapsing.

Yet, we should not forget that silence can be voluntary, coerced, strategic, fearful, protective, or imposed. Treating all silence as morally identical would be too simple. A person may remain silent to protect himself or herself, to protect a victim, or to survive oppression. Conversely, speaking out about your concerns can bring disgrace upon you.

Is there any ethical in the guilty silence?

An oppressive state can turn freedom, peace, truth, and even democracy into instruments of propaganda, producing the image of a perfect world that exists only in hope and imagination. Under such conditions, discretion may become necessary for survival, even when it conflicts with one’s values. But survival-driven silence should not be confused with genuine consent: inward resistance can persist even when outward speech becomes impossible.

For the sensible reader, here is, point by point, the chain that enslaves us, even though we think we are free and at peace with ourselves and society:

1. Freedom permits denunciation.

2. Yet, peace discourages denunciation.

3. Maintaining peace therefore requires silenced truths.

4. Silenced truths cannot expose crimes.

5. Therefore, those who benefit from the peaceful order become complicit.

And so, if we can rebel, at the start of this rebellion are three questions we must feel free to answer:

What kind of peace are we defending?

What truths are we silencing?

Who benefits from that silence?

Are you free to answer these questions?

Peace and love.

Sal.