Why freedom of thought matters more than freedom of speech this election: Elnieke Bronkhorst - Biznews

Elnieke Bronkhorst

I was recently reminded of Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard’s observation that people demand freedom of speech as compensation for the freedom of thought they seldom use.

This is provocative, particularly in a democratic society where freedom of speech is rightly regarded as one of the foundations of political life. Kierkegaard is not necessarily arguing that freedom of speech is unimportant. Rather, he points to an uncomfortable distinction between having the freedom to speak and having the courage to think independently.

The first requires little of us. The second requires considerably more.

Freedom of thought demands that we examine our assumptions, question what we have been told, and consider whether our opinions are our own. It requires intellectual independence. It means being willing to discover that the political party we support may be wrong, or that the argument we have repeated for years does not stand up to scrutiny.

Freedom of speech can sometimes become a substitute for freedom of thought. We can speak loudly, argue passionately and participate endlessly in public debate while never really questioning the ideas that underpin our opinions.

Considering the upcoming local government election

This is worth considering as South Africa approaches another local government election.

Political parties are campaigning. Politicians are making promises. Supporters are arguing with one another. Families are debating politics around dinner tables. Friends are trying to persuade friends, and social media has become an endless stream of political commentary, outrage, humour, accusations and declarations of certainty.

There is nothing inherently wrong with this. In fact, political participation is essential to a healthy democracy. The danger comes when participation becomes a substitute for thought.

That noise can make national party loyalties feel more important than the local record that should guide a municipal vote.

Local government elections are particularly important because they determine who will govern the municipalities. Municipalities are responsible for many of the services South Africans count on every day, including water, sanitation, electricity, roads and refuse removal among others.

Local government elections offer citizens a direct opportunity to exercise precisely the kind of freedom Kierkegaard was talking about – the freedom to think.

The IEC says there are more than 27.6 million registered voters, and registration is only the beginning. According to the Institute of Race Relations (IRR), the 2021 local government elections demonstrated the problem of political disengagement. Some 40 million South Africans were eligible to vote, but only 26 million registered and just 12 million ultimately participated.

A democracy can give people the freedom to choose, but it cannot make them choose thoughtfully.

Changing political landscape

This matters because the political landscape has changed considerably since 2021. The ANC fell below 50% nationally in that election, receiving 46% of the vote, and the result contributed to the growth of coalition government. The IRR notes that there were 66 hung councils following the 2021 elections and that more than a third of South Africa’s 257 municipalities are now governed by coalitions.

The 2026 election is therefore not simply about whether one or another party wins or loses. It is about what voters want local government to look like in an increasingly competitive and fragmented political environment.

What citizens believe

Recent IRR polling provides an interesting reminder that what politicians say is not always what citizens themselves believe.

The 2026 polling found that 70% of South Africans believe government should stop using apartheid-era racial classification to determine who qualifies for business and job opportunities.

This 70% is significant because political rhetoric often creates the impression that South Africans are permanently divided into opposing racial or ideological camps. Yet the polling suggests something more complicated: many ordinary citizens are less interested in political confrontation than in policies that improve their lives.

The IRR’s polling also found that 70% of respondents agreed that politicians use racism and colonialism to excuse their failures.

This should make voters pause.

If politicians can benefit from keeping citizens angry at one another, then perhaps one of the most important democratic acts an individual can perform is simply to think independently before joining the noise.

Politically engaged questions

That does not mean becoming politically indifferent. Quite the opposite. It means becoming more politically engaged.

Rather, voters should ask: what has my municipality achieved? What services am I receiving? How is the municipality spending money? What has my councillor done? What does the party I support propose to do differently? Does its record support its promises? Am I supporting this candidate because I have considered the evidence, or because my peers support the party? Am I voting for a political party because I genuinely believe its policies are best, or because everyone around me tells me that the alternative is worse?

These are not easy questions.

They require us to resist the comfort of political tribalism. They require us to accept that the people we disagree with may be right and that the people we agree with may be wrong.

That is why freedom of thought matters as much as freedom of speech, especially in an election season.

The ballot and the mind that chooses

Freedom of speech gives us the opportunity to tell everyone what we think. Freedom of thought gives us the ability to decide what we think.

South Africa needs both. But as the election approaches, perhaps we should spend less time asking whether everyone is listening to us and more time asking whether we have listened carefully enough to ourselves.

Our parents and friends can tell us who we should vote for. Political parties can tell us how to vote. Social media algorithms can tell us what to believe. Politicians can tell us who is to blame.

But none of them can take away our responsibility to think.

The ballot belongs to the voter. So does the mind that does the choosing.

And perhaps that is Kierkegaard’s challenge to us, almost two centuries on; before demanding the freedom to speak, be sure you’ve had the courage to exercise your freedom to think.

Elnieke Bronkhorst is Production Editor at the Institute of Race Relations. She has a degree in Art History from North-West University and an Honours degree in Art History from the University of South Africa

https://www.biznews.com/rational-perspective/freedom-of-thought-matters-more-this-election