Free Speech has been up for debate for quite some time. The first ever recorded fight for free speech took place in 399 BCE, when Socrates was tried and sentenced to death for “corrupting the youth” and “impiety”—charges that stemmed from his practice of questioning authority, tradition, and the Athenian government. Three politicians, Anytus, Meletus, and Lycon, who represented various classes such as the artisans, poets, and the rhetoricians, were pissed off with Socrates because he basically told them that even though they were good at their jobs and therefore knew more than he did, they did not know everything about everything. Hurting their egos further, Socrates argued that perhaps he was wiser than them because at least he knew that no human can ever know everything about everything. Such critiques of the groups were not taken well, and this led to Socrates’ indictment. In his essay Apology—a derivative of apologia in Greek, which actually means ‘defense’—Socrates asks if he is the most polluted, if he corrupts young men—then when somebody asks them, “Why? What evil does he practice or teach?” why can’t they tell? His accusers use the same arguments against all philosophers—about teaching things up in the clouds and under the earth, having no gods, and making the worse appear the better cause; for they do not like to confess that their pretense of knowledge has been detected—which is the truth.

Stand up comedian Samay Raina, podcaster Ranveer Allahbadia, and YouTuber Apoorva Makhija have found themselves embroiled in controversy after Samay Raina released a new episode of his show ‘India’s Got Latent’. The show has a massive cult following in India, and many in the youth, Gen Z and below, like and find humor in the show. For them, Samay is a breath of fresh air, and in him they see an opportunity to push the envelope. The show’s comedy is definitely brash, and his young audience would even define it as ‘dank’, a term used to describe comedy that is excessively overdone and nonsensical. Dank Humor is also defined as a type of humor that defecates on society’s morals and misfortunes. The controversy in question arose from a question one of the judges on the show, Ranveer Allahbadia, asked one of the contestants, phrased as a ‘would you rather’ question. The question involved incest, and this did not go down well with the audience – most of whom are actually huge fans of Ranveer’s podcast channel ‘BeerBiceps’. Despite the name, the channel mainly holds podcasts and has hosted several huge names, including some members of the current ruling party, ex bureaucrats, and at times, even religious figures.

When Meletus accuses Socrates of corrupting the youth of Athens, Socrates calls him to the stand and asks, “Who, according to you, is responsible for improving the youth?” Meletus responds, “the laws.” Socrates then asks Meletus who, according to him, understands the law well enough to teach it to the youth, and Meletus responds, “the judges.” Socrates prods Meletus a bit more and asks whether the jury, the police, and the councilmen would also be considered capable of understanding the law well enough to improve the youth; Meletus agrees. Socrates then asks that if so many people exist to improve the youth, how come they have let one common man corrupt the youth? Are the good and educated people and their institutions failing to protect the youth from one single person? Taking a note from Socrates’ book, we thus ask: how can one joke (more like a hypothetical question) ruin the youth of this country when the youth have so many good people of faith and numerous places of worship to help them counteract the effects of this evil?

When the matter was taken to the Supreme Court, the Court observed of Ranveer, “There is something very dirty in his mind that has been vomited by way of this program.” Most people who have listened to Ranveer’s original comments agree that the joke was crass and was asked with a motivation to generate shock. Ranveer is a podcaster who is highly aware of how the digital space works; he made a statement to create a buzz, and possibly, he himself may be aware that his question was infantile and crass. But that is beside the point—the government has accused him of ruining Indian culture—the same Indian culture which has survived for the past 5000 years. At this point, it makes sense to pause and wonder: why is the government machinery being expended on this case, at a time when stampedes have allegedly taken more than 100 lives, the air has become unbreathable for most of the nation, and the stock market is falling closer to the ground every day?

After the stampede in Delhi, the Railway Minister sent a notice to X.com asking it to take down more than 250 posts which depicted the stampede on Delhi railway station. These videos were posted by regular commuters – like you and I – who witnessed the atrocity taking place and uploaded a picture of the extent. The Railway Ministry says that such posts will hamper its functioning in the future—functioning that was absent the day the stampede took place. It has also said that such events will create duress on viewers. From trains to your feelings, the Railway Ministry appears to oversee flow of everything.

Further tightening its hold on speech, the government recently blocked the website of a 100-year-old Tamilian newspaper, Vikatan, after the newspaper printed a cartoon which showcased a rather demure Prime Minister of India, sitting shackled and mute, next to the President of the United States, who seems to be holding the former captive. Perhaps this cartoon ruined the youth too! The newspaper’s website was blocked across most parts within hours of the cartoon’s publication. While I might side with the government’s critique of Ranveer’s comments—that they were crass and vulgar—I am not able to find common ground with the government on its critique of Vikatan’s cartoon. Is it not true that the Prime Minister looked like a deer in headlights when one of the reporters asked him a question on Adani? Did he not smile when Trump said the USA would engage in retaliatory tariff practices with India? Did the PM speak up when the US handcuffed our people and removed the turbans of our Sikh men, thus insulting the integrity of our people? If a cartoonish depiction of the truth is ruining the youth of the nation, then truly our dharam is in atoot sankat! If truth is finding it hard to breathe—being continuously stifled with baseless treason laws—then truly Hinduism is under danger. In Hindu philosophy, truth is seen not only as an ethical behavior but also as the ultimate reality (Brahman) that transcends the material world.

Ranveer is no Socrates, yet his controversial remarks raise a critical question: How can one person, armed with provocative words, wield enough power to corrupt an entire generation when a comprehensive machinery of laws and safeguards exists? If a single voice manages to sway the youth so profoundly, it suggests either that this voice resonates with what the majority already desires or that our protective institutions are failing to perform their duty. Ranveer’s joke was widely decried as crude and shock-driven, and the public shunning should have been enough to settle the controversy. Yet, the state’s heavy-handed reaction suggests it may be seizing the opportunity to push through the long-discussed broadcast bill. This move appears less about addressing the controversy and more about tightening control over free expression, fueling concerns about government overreach in a time when free speech should be celebrated rather than suppressed.

Today, we are roughly 2400 years ahead of the day since Socrates was indicted for corrupting the youth. However, the same accusations materialize every time the government finds itself in a catch. Sure, India is a populous country, but here’s hoping there’s still space for truth to survive and for it to thrive.