The Crucible Free Speech Analysis

949 Words4 Pages

Maximilien Robespierre incited the French Revolution with the purported goal of delivering equality to France by displacing the oppressive monarchy. Yet, when Robespierre and his followers overthrew the king, Robespierre implemented a form of government that was as despotic as the old regime. To preserve his power, Robespierre killed anyone who criticized him or the insurgency. No one wanted to be indicted and executed for challenging Robespierre, so people altered their speech to fit within the confines deemed acceptable by Robespierre. Throughout history, the suppression of speech has been a tool used to retain power. In this regard, Arthur Miller’s play The Crucible is similar to Robespierre’s France. The Crucible connects American society in the 1950s to Puritan society; in both instances, strict regulation imparted on free speech perpetuated mass hysteria. Miller employs The Crucible to emphasize that conversation is the primary vehicle that drives societies toward beneficial change. The Crucible details Salem town’s descent into a state of mass frenzy as a result of the witch trials; this extensive panic is able to persist because of the limits imposed on free speech. Rebecca Nurse is well regarded throughout Salem thanks to her piety and the good reputation held by her late husband, Francis Nurse (Miller 25, The Crucible). Rebecca …show more content…

It is interesting to note that this pattern of mass frenzy is not exclusive to just Puritan society and America in the 1950s. This is a recurring element throughout world history. Thus, Miller’s The Crucible is not just a social commentary of America in the 1950s. Rather, it is a political statement that encapsulates a meaning far broader in scope. It serves as a warning for the future of humanity, as a world bereft of free speech is a world unequipped to combat