WIST Quotations

Thurber, James -- Essay (1958-12-07), “State of the Nation’s Humor: ‘On the Brink of Was,'” New York Times Magazine

Dave — Wed, 11 Mar 2026 17:06:51 +0000

America must learn that humor, whatever form it may take, can be one of our strongest allies, but it cannot flourish in a weather of fear and hysteria and intimidation.

James Thurber (1894-1961) American humorist, cartoonist, writer
Essay (1958-12-07), “State of the Nation’s Humor: ‘On the Brink of Was,'” New York Times Magazine
(Source)

Commager, Henry Steele -- Essay (1965-12-18), “The Problem of Dissent,” Saturday Review

Dave — Mon, 16 Feb 2026 20:11:13 +0000

And as for the argument that criticism [of government foreign policy] may give aid and comfort to some enemy, that is a form of blackmail unworthy of those who profess it. If it is to be accepted, we will have an end to genuine discussion of foreign policies, for it will inevitably be invoked to stop debate and criticism whenever that debate gets acrimonious or the criticism cuts too close to the bone. And to the fevered mind of the FBI, the CIA, and some Senators, criticism always gives aid and comfort to the enemy or cuts too close to
the bone.

Henry Steele Commager (1902-1998) American historian, writer, activist
Essay (1965-12-18), “The Problem of Dissent,” Saturday Review
(Source)

Reprinted in Freedom and Order, Part 6 (1966).

Sections of the essay (including this portion) were read into the Congressional Record, Senate Proceedings (1969-06-26), as part of a speech by former Senator Wayne Morse (D-Oregon) at the commencement of Fairleigh Dickinson University (1969-06-07); Morse's speech was read in by Senator Gary Hart (D-Colo.).

Commager, Henry Steele -- Essay (1965-12-18), “The Problem of Dissent,” Saturday Review

Dave — Mon, 02 Feb 2026 23:08:29 +0000

But this we can say with certainty: a government and a society that silences those who dissent is one that has lost its way. This we can say: that what is essential in a free society is that there should be an atmosphere where those who wish to dissent and even to demonstrate can do so without fear of recrimination or vilification.

Commager, Henry Steele -- Essay (1965-12-18), “The Problem of Dissent,” Saturday Review

Dave — Mon, 26 Jan 2026 16:38:41 +0000

The rich and respectable have always had their ways of making their discontent heard; the poor and unorganized must resort to protests and marches and demonstrations.

Roosevelt, Eleanor -- Column (1943-05-11), “My Day”

Dave — Tue, 06 Jan 2026 18:40:16 +0000

In the democracies of the world, the passion for freedom of speech and of thought is always accentuated when there is an effort anywhere to keep ideas away from people and to prevent them from making their own decisions. One of the best ways of enslaving a people is to keep them from education and thus make it impossible for them to understand what is going on in the world as a whole. […] The second way of enslaving a people is to suppress the sources of information, not only by burning books, but by controlling all the other ways in which ideas are transmitted.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Column (1943-05-11), “My Day”
(Source)

Roosevelt, Theodore -- Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star

Dave — Thu, 13 Nov 2025 20:26:37 +0000

Government by the people means that the people have the right to do their own thinking and to do their own speaking about their public servants. They must speak truthfully and they must not be disloyal to the country, and it is their highest duty by truthful criticism to make and keep the public servants loyal to the country.

Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) American politician, statesman, conservationist, writer, US President (1901–1909)
Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star
(Source)

Regarding a bill which had just passed the Senate Judiciary Committee, which would fine and imprison any one who used "contemptuous or slurring language about the President."

This passage was added to later editions of his essay, "Lincoln and Free Speech,", as printed in The Works of Theodore Roosevelt, vol. 21, The Great Adventure, ch. 7 (1925). It does not appear in the original version of the essay or book.

Roosevelt, Eleanor -- Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”

Dave — Tue, 11 Nov 2025 18:54:42 +0000

What is going on in the Un-American Activities Committee worries me primarily because little people have become frightened and we find ourselves living in the atmosphere of a police state, where people close doors before they state what they think or look over their shoulders apprehensively before they express an opinion.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”
(Source)

Roosevelt, Theodore -- Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star

Dave — Thu, 06 Nov 2025 17:21:59 +0000

In a self-governing country the people are called citizens. Under a despotism or autocracy the people are called subjects. This is because in a free country the people are themselves sovereign, while in a despotic country the people are under a sovereign. In the United States the people are all citizens, including its President. The rest of them are fellow citizens of the President. In Germany the people are all subjects of the Kaiser. They are not his fellow citizens, they are his subjects.
This is the essential difference between the United States and Germany, but the difference would vanish if we now submitted to the foolish or traitorous persons who endeavor to make it a crime to tell the truth about the Administration when the Administration is guilty of incompetence or other shortcomings. Such an endeavor is itself a crime against the nation. Those who take such an attitude are guilty of moral treason of a kind both abject and dangerous.

Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) American politician, statesman, conservationist, writer, US President (1901–1909)
Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star
(Source)

Regarding a bill which had just passed the Senate Judiciary Committee which would fine and imprison any one who used "contemptuous or slurring language about the President."

This passage was added to later editions of his essay, "Lincoln and Free Speech,", as printed in The Works of Theodore Roosevelt, vol. 21, The Great Adventure, ch. 7 (1925). It does not appear in the original version of the essay or book.

Roosevelt, Eleanor -- Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”

Dave — Tue, 14 Oct 2025 17:35:04 +0000

One thing is sure — none of the arts flourishes on censorship and repression. And by this time it should be evident that the American public is capable of doing its own censoring.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”
(Source)

Roosevelt, Franklin Delano -- Speech (1941-01-06) to Congress, Annual Message (State of the Union), “Four Freedoms,” Washington, D. C.

Dave — Wed, 05 Mar 2025 23:19:42 +0000

In the future days, which we seek to make secure, we look forward to a world founded upon four essential human freedoms.
The first is freedom of speech and expression — everywhere in the world.
The second is freedom of every person to worship God in his own way — everywhere in the world.
The third is freedom from want — which, translated into world terms, means economic understandings which will secure to every nation a healthy peacetime life for its inhabitants — everywhere in the world.
The fourth is freedom from fear — which, translated into world terms, means a world-wide reduction of armaments to such a point and in such a thorough fashion that no nation will be in a position to commit an act of physical aggression against any neighbor — anywhere in the world.
That is no vision of a distant millennium. It is a definite basis for a kind of world attainable in our own time and generation. That kind of world is the very antithesis of the so-called new order of tyranny which the dictators seek to create with the crash of a bomb.

Franklin Delano Roosevelt (1882–1945) American lawyer, politician, statesman, US President (1933–1945)
Speech (1941-01-06) to Congress, Annual Message (State of the Union), “Four Freedoms,” Washington, D. C.
(Source)

FDR's first presentation of his "Four Freedoms" framework.

Roosevelt, Theodore -- Speech (1910-04-23), “Citizenship in a Republic [The Man in the Arena],” Sorbonne, Paris

Dave — Thu, 02 Jan 2025 21:08:43 +0000

Not only should there be complete liberty in matters of religion and opinion, but complete liberty for each man to lead his life as he desires, provided only that in so doing he does not wrong his neighbors.

Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) American politician, statesman, conservationist, writer, US President (1901–1909)
Speech (1910-04-23), “Citizenship in a Republic [The Man in the Arena],” Sorbonne, Paris
(Source)

Orwell, George -- Burmese Days, ch. 5 (1934)

Dave — Wed, 21 Aug 2024 19:36:03 +0000

It is a stifling, stultifying world in which to live. It is a world in which every word and every thought is censored. In England it is hard even to imagine such an atmosphere. Everyone is free in England; we sell our souls in public and buy them back in private, among our friends. But even friendship can hardly exist when every white man is a cog in the wheels of despotism. Free speech is unthinkable. All other kinds of freedom are permitted. You are free to be a drunkard, an idler, a coward, a backbiter, a fornicator; but you are not free to think for yourself. Your opinion on every subject of any conceivable importance is dictated for you by the pukka sahibs’ code.

George Orwell (1903-1950) English journalist, essayist, writer [pseud. of Eric Arthur Blair]
Burmese Days, ch. 5 (1934)
(Source)

Of the life of the Englishman John Flory, the protagonist, in Burma, part of the 1920s British Raj. Orwell's first novel, it was based on his own experiences as a police officer in that part of the word. The pukka sahibs were the "excellent fellows," i.e., the European (white) colonialists of the region.

Jacobs, Jane -- “No Virtue in Meek Conformity” (1952)

Dave — Mon, 22 Jan 2024 19:47:13 +0000

The other threat to the security of our tradition, I believe, lies at home. It is the current fear of radical ideas and of people who propound them. I do not agree with extremists of either the left or the right, but I think they should be allowed to speak and to publish, both because they themselves have, and ought to have, rights, and once their rights are gone, the rights of the rest of us are hardly safe.

Jane Jacobs (1916-2006) American-Canadian journalist, author, urban theorist, activist
“No Virtue in Meek Conformity” (1952)
(Source)

Foreword to her response to a State Department Loyalty Security Board interrogatory (1952-03-25). Reprinted in Vital Little Plans (2016).

Twain, Mark -- Following the Equator, ch. 20, Epigraph (1897)

Dave — Wed, 13 Dec 2023 20:58:26 +0000

It is by the goodness of God that in our country we have those three unspeakably precious things: freedom of speech, freedom of conscience, and the prudence never to exercise either of them.

Mark Twain (1835-1910) American writer [pseud. of Samuel Clemens]
Following the Equator, ch. 20, Epigraph (1897)
(Source)

Cited as from Pudd'nhead Wilson's New Calendar. Sometimes misquoted "... never to practice either."

Cox, Marcelene -- “Ask Any Woman” column, Ladies’ Home Journal (1945-11)

Dave — Tue, 25 Jul 2023 16:45:00 +0000

It is all right to say exactly what you think if you have learned to think exactly.

Marcelene Cox (1900-1998) American writer, columnist, aphorist
“Ask Any Woman” column, Ladies’ Home Journal (1945-11)
(Source)

Cox provided a variant of this aphorism in the 1959-01 issue of LHJ: "Anyone has the right to say what he thinks, if he thinks."

Hitchens, Christopher -- “Be It Resolved: Freedom of Speech Includes the Freedom to Hate,” debate, University of Toronto (2006-11-15)

Dave — Wed, 07 Jun 2023 14:28:50 +0000

To whom do you award the right to decide which speech is harmful, or who is the harmful speaker? Or to determine in advance what are the harmful consequences going to be that we know enough about in advance to prevent? To whom would you give this job? To whom are you going to award the task of being the censor? Isn’t a famous old story that the man who has to read all the pornography, in order to decide what’s fit to be passed and what is fit not to be, is the man most likely to become debauched? Did you hear any speaker in the opposition to this motion, eloquent as one of them was, to whom you would delegate the task of deciding for you what you could read? To whom you would give the job of deciding for you — relieve you of the responsibility of hearing what you might have to hear? Do you know anyone? Hands up. Do you know anyone to whom you’d give this job? Does anyone have a nominee?

Christopher Hitchens (1949-2011) English intellectual, polemicist, socio-political critic
“Be It Resolved: Freedom of Speech Includes the Freedom to Hate,” debate, University of Toronto (2006-11-15)
(Source)

Video (at 9:23).

Madison, James -- Speech Introducing Proposed Constitutional Amendments (1789-06-08)

Dave — Fri, 21 Apr 2023 21:37:02 +0000

The civil rights of none shall be abridged on account of religious belief or worship, nor shall any national religion be established, nor shall the full and equal rights of conscience be in any manner, or on any pretext, infringed.

The people shall not be deprived or abridged of their right to speak, to write, or to publish their sentiments; and the freedom of the press, as one of the great bulwarks of liberty, shall be inviolable.

The people shall not be restrained from peaceably assembling and consulting for their common good; nor from applying to the Legislature by petitions, or remonstrances, for redress of their grievances.

James Madison (1751-1836) American statesman, political theorist, US President (1809-17)
Speech Introducing Proposed Constitutional Amendments (1789-06-08)
(Source)

Speech before the House of Representatives, proposing a Bill of Rights amending the US Constitution. This was the first draft of the text that would go on to become the First Amendment.

Black, Hugo -- Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463, 482 (1966) [dissent]

Dave — Thu, 13 Apr 2023 21:38:06 +0000

I find it difficult to see how talk about sex can be placed under the kind of censorship the Court here approves without subjecting our society to more dangers than we can anticipate at the moment. It was to avoid exactly such dangers that the First Amendment was written and adopted. For myself I would follow the course which I believe is required by the First Amendment, that is, recognize that sex at least as much as any other aspect of life is so much a part of our society that its discussion should not be made a crime.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463, 482 (1966) [dissent]
(Source)

Black, Hugo -- James Madison Lecture, NYU School of Law (1960-02-17)

Dave — Thu, 16 Mar 2023 23:56:32 +0000

Since the earliest days, philosophers have dreamed of a country where the mind and spirit of man would be free; where there would be no limits to inquiry; where men would be free to explore the unknown and to challenge the most deeply rooted beliefs and principles. Our First Amendment was a bold effort to adopt this principle — to establish a country with no legal restrictions of any kind upon the subjects people could investigate, discuss, and deny.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
James Madison Lecture, NYU School of Law (1960-02-17)
(Source)

The inaugural Madison lecture. Reprinted as "The Bill of Rights," NYU Law Review, Vol. 35 (Apr 1960)

Black, Hugo -- Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 151 (1959) [dissent]

Dave — Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:53:51 +0000

History should teach us then, that in times of high emotional excitement minority parties and groups which advocate extremely unpopular social or governmental innovations will always be typed as criminal gangs and attempts will always be made to drive them out. It was knowledge of this fact, and of its great dangers, that caused the Founders of our land to enact the First Amendment as a guarantee that neither Congress nor the people would do anything to hinder or destroy the capacity of individuals and groups to seek converts and votes for any cause, however radical or unpalatable their principles might seem under the accepted notions of the time.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 151 (1959) [dissent]
(Source)

Black, Hugo -- Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 146 (1959) [dissent]

Dave — Thu, 15 Sep 2022 14:33:42 +0000

Our Constitution assumes that the common sense of the people and their attachment to our country will enable them, after free discussion, to withstand ideas that are wrong. To say that our patriotism must be protected against false ideas by means other than these is, I think, to make a baseless charge. Unless we can rely on these qualities—if, in short, we begin to punish speech — we cannot honestly proclaim ourselves to be a free Nation and we have lost what the Founders of this land risked their lives and their sacred honor to defend.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 146 (1959) [dissent]
(Source)

Hughes, Charles Evans -- De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364-365 (1937) [majority]

Dave — Thu, 08 Sep 2022 19:17:41 +0000

These rights may be abused by using speech or press or assembly in order to incite to violence and crime. The people, through their legislatures may protect themselves against that abuse. But the legislative intervention, can find constitutional justification only by dealing with the abuse. The rights themselves must not be curtailed.The greater the importance of safeguarding the community from incitements to the overthrow of our institutions by force and violence, the more imperative is the need to preserve inviolate the constitutional rights of free speech, free press and free assembly in order to maintain the opportunity for free political discussion, to the end that government may be responsive to the will of the people and that changes, if desired, may be obtained by peaceful means. Therein lies the security of the Republic, the very foundation of constitutional government.

Charles Evans Hughes, Sr. (1862-1948) American statesman, politician, Supreme Court Justice (1910-1916, 1930-1941)
De Jonge v. Oregon, 299 U.S. 353, 364-365 (1937) [majority]
(Source)

Black, Hugo -- Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 145-46 (1959) [dissent]

Dave — Thu, 01 Sep 2022 17:05:23 +0000

The First Amendment means to me, however, that the only constitutional way our Government can preserve itself is to leave its people the fullest possible freedom to praise, criticize or discuss, as they see fit, all governmental policies and to suggest, if they desire, that even its most fundamental postulates are bad and should be changed.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
Barenblatt v. United States, 360 U.S. 109, 145-46 (1959) [dissent]
(Source)

Commager, Henry Steele -- Essay (1949-11-05), “What Ideas Are Safe?” Saturday Review

Dave — Wed, 06 Apr 2022 14:51:23 +0000

A nation which, in the name of loyalty or of patriotism or of a sincere and high-sounding idea, discourages criticism and dissent, and puts a premium on acquiescence and conformity, is headed for disaster.

Henry Steele Commager (1902-1998) American historian, writer, activist
Essay (1949-11-05), “What Ideas Are Safe?” Saturday Review
(Source)

Collected in Freedom and Order (1966).

Commager, Henry Steele -- Essay (1947-09), “Who Is Loyal to America?” sec. 3, Harper’s Magazine, Vol. 195, No. 1168

Dave — Wed, 05 Jan 2022 15:25:55 +0000

Who are those who are really disloyal? Those who inflame racial hatreds, who sow religious and class dissensions. Those who subvert the Constitution by violating the freedom of the ballot box. Those who make a mockery of majority rule by the use of the filibuster. Those who impair democracy by denying equal educational facilities. Those who frustrate justice by lynch law or by making a farce of jury trials. Those who deny freedom of speech and of the press and of assembly. Those who press for special favors against the interest of the commonwealth. Those who regard public office as a source of private gain. Those who would exalt the military over the civil. Those who for selfish and private purposes stir up national antagonisms and expose the world to the ruin of war.

Henry Steele Commager (1902-1998) American historian, writer, activist
Essay (1947-09), “Who Is Loyal to America?” sec. 3, Harper’s Magazine, Vol. 195, No. 1168
(Source)

Regarding disloyalty tests and loyalty oaths. Reprinted in Freedom, Loyalty, Dissent (1954).

Wilson, Woodrow -- Speech, Institute of France, Paris (10 May 1919)

Dave — Thu, 02 Sep 2021 18:03:39 +0000

I have always been among those who believed that the greatest freedom of speech was the greatest safety, because if a man is a fool, the best thing to do is to encourage him to advertise the fact by speaking. It cannot be so easily discovered if you allow him to remain silent and look wise, but if you let him speak, the secret is out, and the world knows that he is a fool. So it is by the exposure of folly that it is defeated, not by the seclusion of folly, and, in this free air of free speech, men get into that sort of communication with one another which constitutes the basis of all common achievement.

Woodrow Wilson (1856-1924) US President (1913-20), educator, political scientist
Speech, Institute of France, Paris (10 May 1919)
(Source)

Douglass, Frederick -- “A Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston” (9 Dec 1880)

Dave — Thu, 03 Jun 2021 17:15:20 +0000

Equally clear is the right to hear. To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker. It is just as criminal to rob a man of his right to speak and hear as it would be to rob him of his money.

Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) American abolitionist, orator, writer
“A Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston” (9 Dec 1880)
(Source)

Obama, Barack -- Speech, United Nations (25 Sep 2012)

Dave — Wed, 21 Apr 2021 16:56:01 +0000

As President of our country and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so.

Barack Obama (b. 1961) American politician, US President (2009-2017)
Speech, United Nations (25 Sep 2012)
(Source)

Andrew, John A. -- Letter (1860)

Dave — Mon, 22 Feb 2021 17:42:05 +0000

“The right to think, to know and to utter,” as John Milton said, is the dearest of all liberties. Without this right, there can be no liberty to any people; with it, there can be no slavery.

John A. Andrew (1818-1867) American lawyer, politician, abolitionist
Letter (1860)
(Source)

Letter written after his election as Massachusetts governor. referencing Milton's Areopagitica. Quoted by Wendell Phillips in his "Mobs and Education" speech (16 Dec 1860), and often attributed to Phillips.

Rushdie, Salman -- “Do we have to fight the battle for the Enlightenment all over again?” The Independent (22 Jan 2005)

Dave — Thu, 08 Mar 2018 00:14:50 +0000

It’s no trick to support the free speech of somebody you agree with or to whose opinion you are indifferent. The defense of free speech begins at the point when people say something you can’t stand. If you can’t defend their right to say it, then you don’t believe in free speech.

Salman Rushdie (b. 1947) Indian novelist
“Do we have to fight the battle for the Enlightenment all over again?” The Independent (22 Jan 2005)
(Source)

Roosevelt, Theodore -- Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star

Dave — Tue, 23 Aug 2016 02:49:16 +0000

Our loyalty is due entirely to the United States. It is due to the President only and exactly to the degree in which he efficiently serves the United States. It is our duty to support him when he serves the United States well. It is our duty to oppose him when he serves it badly.

Theodore Roosevelt (1858–1919) American politician, statesman, conservationist, writer, US President (1901–1909)
Essay (1918-04-06), “Citizens or Subjects?” Kansas City Star
(Source)

Regarding a bill which had just passed the Senate Judiciary Committee which would fine and imprison any one who used "contemptuous or slurring language about the President."

This passage was added to later editions of his essay, "Lincoln and Free Speech,", as printed in The Works of Theodore Roosevelt, vol. 21, The Great Adventure, ch. 7 (1925). It does not appear in the original version of the essay or book. See Roosevelt and Roosevelt.

Adams, John -- Essay (1765-10-21), “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” No. 4, Boston Gazette

Dave — Wed, 10 Aug 2016 23:55:27 +0000

Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak and write.

John Adams (1735–1826) American lawyer, Founding Father, statesman, US President (1797–1801)
Essay (1765-10-21), “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” No. 4, Boston Gazette
(Source)

Adams, John -- Essay (1765-09-30), “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” No. 3, Boston Gazette

Dave — Thu, 28 Jul 2016 04:16:30 +0000

The jaws of power are always open to devour, and her arm is always stretched out, if possible, to destroy the freedom of thinking, speaking, and writing.

John Adams (1735–1826) American lawyer, Founding Father, statesman, US President (1797–1801)
Essay (1765-09-30), “A Dissertation on the Canon and the Feudal Law,” No. 3, Boston Gazette
(Source)

Originally written for the Sodalitas Club.

Voltaire -- (Spurious)

Dave — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:33:09 +0000

I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.

Voltaire (1694-1778) French writer [pseud. of Francois-Marie Arouet]
(Spurious)
(Source)

The words are not found in any actual Voltaire source. They belong to historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall, writing as S. G. Tallentyre, in The Friends of Voltaire (1906), describing an 1759 incident where Voltaire learned that Claude-Adrien Helvétius' book On the Mind [De l’esprit] had been burned (along with Voltaire's own On Natural Law) after condemnation by the Paris Parliament and the Sorbonne. Voltaire himself wasn't impressed by Helvétius' book, but thought a book burning was unjustified. Hall wrote:

"What a fuss about an omelette!" he had exclaimed when he heard of the burning. How abominably unjust to persecute a man for such an airy trifle as that! "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," was his attitude now.

Hall later wrote that the actual words were her own and ought not to have had quotation marks.

Variations:

I wholly disapprove of what you say -- and will defend to the death your right to say it.
Monsieur l’Abbé, je déteste ce que vous écrivez, mais je donnerais ma vie pour que vous puissiez continuer à écrire. [Monsieur l’abbé, I detest what you write, but I would give my life to make it possible for you to continue to write.]

For more detailed information, see Quote Origin: I Disapprove of What You Say, But I Will Defend to the Death Your Right to Say It – Quote Investigator®.

Broun, Heywood -- New York World (23 Oct 1926)

Dave — Tue, 17 May 2016 20:47:38 +0000

Everybody favors free speech in the slack moments when no axes are being ground.

Heywood Broun (1888-1939) American journalist, author
New York World (23 Oct 1926)

Meiklejohn, Alexander -- Testimony before the Senate Sub-Committee on Constitutional Rights (1955)

Dave — Fri, 28 Aug 2015 13:23:17 +0000

Whatever may be the immediate gains and losses, the dangers to our safety arising from political suppression are always greater than the dangers to that safety arising from political freedom. Suppression is always foolish. Freedom is always wise. That is the faith, the experimental faith, by which we Americans have undertaken to live. If we, the citizens of today, cannot shake ourselves free from the hysteria which blinds us to that faith, there is little hope for peace and security, either at home or abroad.

Alexander Meiklejohn (1872-1964) Philosopher, university administrator, civil libertarian
Testimony before the Senate Sub-Committee on Constitutional Rights (1955)

Kennedy, Anthony -- United States v. Alvarez, 567 U. S. ____, *16 (2012) [Plurality]

Dave — Thu, 23 Apr 2015 12:26:32 +0000

The remedy for speech that is false is speech that is true. This is the ordinary course in a free society. The response to the unreasoned is the rational; to the uninformed, the enlightened; to the straight-out lie, the simple truth.
.

Anthony Kennedy (b. 1936) US Supreme Court Justice
United States v. Alvarez, 567 U. S. ____, *16 (2012) [Plurality]

Gaiman, Neil -- Blog entry (2008-12-01), “Why defend freedom of icky speech?”

Dave — Thu, 22 Jan 2015 13:19:25 +0000

I loved coming to the US in 1992, mostly because I loved the idea that freedom of speech was paramount. I still do. With all its faults, the US has Freedom of Speech. The First Amendment states that you can’t be arrested for saying things the government doesn’t like. You can say what you like, write what you like, and know that the remedy to someone saying or writing or showing something that offends you is not to read it, or to speak out against it. I loved that I could read and make my own mind up about something.

Neil Gaiman (b. 1960) British author, screenwriter, fabulist
Blog entry (2008-12-01), “Why defend freedom of icky speech?”
(Source)

Gaiman, Neil -- Twitter (7 Jan 2014)

Dave — Tue, 13 Jan 2015 14:52:44 +0000

How important are free speech and satire? Important enough that people will murder others to silence the kind of speech they don’t like.

Neil Gaiman (b. 1960) British author, screenwriter, fabulist
Twitter (7 Jan 2014)
(Source)

Regarding the mass murder at the Charlie Hebdo magazine in Paris.

Washington, George -- Speech to the Officers at Newburgh (15 Mar 1783)

Dave — Thu, 01 May 2014 12:59:37 +0000

If Men are to be precluded from offering their Sentiments on a matter, which may involve the most serious and alarming consequences, that can invite the consideration of Mankind, reason is of no use to us; the freedom of Speech may be taken away, and dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep, to the Slaughter.

George Washington (1732–1799) American military leader, Founding Father, US President (1789–1797)
Speech to the Officers at Newburgh (15 Mar 1783)
(Source)

Douglass, Frederick -- “A Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston,” speech (9 Dec 1860)

Dave — Wed, 30 Apr 2014 12:58:56 +0000

To suppress free speech is a double wrong. It violates the rights of the hearer as well as those of the speaker.

Frederick Douglass (1817-1895) American abolitionist, orator, writer
“A Plea for Freedom of Speech in Boston,” speech (9 Dec 1860)

Kennedy, John F. -- Speech, Philadelphia (31 Oct 1960)

Dave — Mon, 21 Apr 2014 12:35:00 +0000

I believe in an America where the rights that I have described are enjoyed by all, regardless of their race or their creed or their national origin — where every citizen is free to think and speak as he pleases and write and worship as he pleases — and where every citizen is free to vote as he pleases, without instructions from anyone, his employer, the union leader or his clergyman.

John F. Kennedy (1917-1963) American politician, author, journalist, US President (1961–63)
Speech, Philadelphia (31 Oct 1960)
(Source)

Churchill, Winston -- Debate, House of Commons (13 Oct 1943)

Dave — Fri, 28 Mar 2014 12:10:59 +0000

Everyone is in favor of free speech. Hardly a day passes without its being extolled, but some people’s idea of it is that they are free to say what they like, but if anyone says anything back, that is an outrage.

Winston Churchill (1874-1965) British statesman and author
Debate, House of Commons (13 Oct 1943)
(Source)

More discussion of this quotation: If Anyone Says Anything Back, That Is an Outrage – Quote Investigator.

Johnson, Lyndon -- Speech (1939-09-15), Chamber of Commerce Barbeque, Smithville, Texas

Dave — Wed, 15 May 2013 13:01:12 +0000

Whether we are New Dealer, Old Dealer, Liberty Leaguer or Red, whether we agree or not, we still have the right to think and speak how we feel.

Lyndon B. Johnson (1908-1973) American politician, educator, US President (1963-69)
Speech (1939-09-15), Chamber of Commerce Barbeque, Smithville, Texas

Voltaire -- (Misattributed)

Dave — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:40:04 +0000

To learn who rules over you, simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize.

Voltaire (1694-1778) French writer [pseud. of Francois-Marie Arouet]
(Misattributed)

Frequently attributed to Voltaire in memes, but unsourced in any of his writings. More accurately attributed to Kevin Alfred Strom during a 1993 anti-semitic screed on a radio broadcast:

To determine the true rulers of any society, all you must do is ask yourself this question: Who is it that I am not permitted to criticize?

More discussion of the attribution here, here and here.

Johnson, Lyndon -- Press Conference (1967-11-17)

Dave — Wed, 07 Nov 2012 16:55:39 +0000

We believe very strongly on preserving the right to differ in this country, and the right to dissent; and if I have done a good job of anything since I’ve been president, it’s to ensure that there are plenty of dissenters.

Lyndon B. Johnson (1908-1973) American politician, educator, US President (1963-69)
Press Conference (1967-11-17)
(Source)

Video:

LBJ's News Conference, 11/17/1967. MP597. - YouTube (at 29:02).
President Johnson on the Vietnam War | November 17, 1967 | C-SPAN.org (at 26:48).

Black, Hugo -- Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147, 157 (1959) [concurring]

Dave — Wed, 05 Sep 2012 14:02:43 +0000

Certainly the First Amendment’s language leaves no room for inference that abridgments of speech and press can be made just because they are slight. That Amendment provides, in simple words, that “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press.” I read “no law … abridging” to mean no law abridging.

Hugo Black (1886-1971) American politician and jurist, US Supreme Court Justice (1937-71)
Smith v. California, 361 U.S. 147, 157 (1959) [concurring]
(Source)

Brandeis, Louis -- Whitney v California, 274 US 357, 377 (1927) (concurring)

Dave — Thu, 09 Sep 2010 14:46:49 +0000

Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, self-reliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence.

Louis Brandeis (1856-1941) American lawyer, activist, Supreme Court Justice (1916-39)
Whitney v California, 274 US 357, 377 (1927) (concurring)
(Source)

Stewart, Jon -- The Daily Show (2001-09-20)

Dave — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 12:12:23 +0000

The show in general we feel like is a privilege. Even the idea that we can sit in the back of the country and make wise cracks … which is really what we do. We sit in the back and throw spitballs — but never forgetting that it is a luxury in this country that allows us to do that. That is, a country that allows for open satire, and I know that sounds basic and it sounds like it goes without saying. But that’s really what this whole situation is about. It’s the difference between closed and open. The difference between free and … burdened. And we don’t take that for granted here, by any stretch of the imagination.

Jon Stewart (b. 1962) American satirist, comedian, and television host. [b. Jonathan Stuart Leibowitz]
The Daily Show (2001-09-20)
(Source)

Stevenson, Adlai -- Speech (1952-08-28), “Faith in Liberalism,” State Committee of the Liberal Party, New York City

Dave — Mon, 10 Aug 2009 13:27:38 +0000

The sound of tireless voices is the price we pay for the right to hear the music of our own opinions. But there is also, it seems to me, a moment at which democracy must prove its capacity to act. Every man has a right to be heard; but no man has the right to strangle democracy with a single set of vocal chords.

Adlai Stevenson (1900–1965) American diplomat, statesman
Speech (1952-08-28), “Faith in Liberalism,” State Committee of the Liberal Party, New York City
(Source)

Gaiman, Neil -- Blog entry (2008-12-01), “Why defend freedom of icky speech?”

Dave — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 12:26:38 +0000

You ask, What makes it worth defending? and the only answer I can give is this: Freedom to write, freedom to read, freedom to own material that you believe is worth defending means you’re going to have to stand up for stuff you don’t believe is worth defending, even stuff you find actively distasteful, because laws are big blunt instruments that do not differentiate between what you like and what you don’t, because prosecutors are humans and bear grudges and fight for re-election, because one person’s obscenity is another person’s art. Because if you don’t stand up for the stuff you don’t like, when they come for the stuff you do like, you’ve already lost.

Neil Gaiman (b. 1960) British author, screenwriter, fabulist
Blog entry (2008-12-01), “Why defend freedom of icky speech?”
(Source)

Roosevelt, Eleanor -- Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”

Dave — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:57:02 +0000

I have been one of those who have carried the fight for complete freedom of information in the United Nations. And while accepting the fact that some of our press, our radio commentators, our prominent citizens and our movies may at times be blamed legitimately for things they have said and done, still I feel that the fundamental right of freedom of thought and expression is essential. If you curtail what the other fellow says and does, you curtail what you yourself may say and do.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Column (1947-10-29), “My Day”
(Source)

On the House Un-American Activities Committee.

Roosevelt, Eleanor -- Column (1943-04-15), “My Day”

Dave — Thu, 15 May 2008 10:27:34 +0000

It is not only in war, however, that we fight for freedom. One fights for freedom in personal contacts and in many phases of civilian life. When the war is over, the four freedoms will not have been won, we shall simply have dominated their more aggressive enemies. At all times, day by day, we have to continue fighting for freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom from fear, and freedom from want — for these are things that must be gained in peace as well as in war. At all times, day by day, we have to continue fighting for freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom from want — for these are things that must be gained in peace as well as in war.

Eleanor Roosevelt (1884–1962) First Lady of the US (1933–1945), politician, diplomat, activist
Column (1943-04-15), “My Day”
(Source)

Stevenson, Adlai -- Speech (1961-01-18), US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC

Dave — Tue, 08 Apr 2008 12:02:52 +0000

The first principle of a free society is an untrammeled flow of words in an open forum.

Adlai Stevenson (1900–1965) American diplomat, statesman
Speech (1961-01-18), US Senate Committee on Foreign Relations, Washington, DC
(Source)

Statement given by Stevenson after his nomination by President-elect Kennedy to be ambassador to the United Nation, which office he held until his death in 1965. The speech (or this passage) is often cited to the New York Times coverage of it the following day, though often mistakenly dating it in 1962.

In context, he is addressing criticisms of the UN as a "debating society," noting that the US Congress often serves as such, from which he extends this principle.

Holmes, Oliver Wendell, Jr. -- Schenck v. United States (3 Mar 1919)

Dave — Fri, 21 Sep 2007 10:50:56 +0000

The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.

Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr. (1841-1935) American jurist, Supreme Court Justice
Schenck v. United States (3 Mar 1919)
(Source)

Stewart, Potter -- Ginzburg v. United States, 383 U.S. 463, 498 (1966) [dissenting]