In the long evolutionary history of the human race there have probably been few more difficult periods than the one we are in today. Difficulties have arisen because human consciousness is awakening at a rapid rate, even exponentially. This is good and meant to happen. But such rapid growth of the critical mind presents challenging demands – politically, economically and psychologically. In the past five hundred years there has been a sharp rise in human self-assertiveness, selfishness and competition, leading to increased conflict and warfare worldwide. Adding to the problem is a human desire for a consumer-driven life style which has created a high demand for the common resources of the planet.

Most sensible people recognise that speech is a better way to resolve disagreements than war is. Yet, the war of words that passes for “civil discourse” these days is too often anything but civil. In a thriving, robust democracy the right to free speech is inviolable and a true necessity if there is to be a broad presentation of ideas and a free sharing of opinions. In such a society, how can speech become the vehicle for achieving understanding and the establishing of common ground, rather than a means to subdue one’s “opponents”—meaning, all those who think differently?

Much controversy has been stirred up by the recent awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama so early into his Presidency. Some see it as an embarrassment and encumbrance to the work before him, others see it as a triumph of good intentions over effective implementation of policy; others still, regard it as little more than a slight against the previous administration. Whatever the rights and wrongs of these and the many other points of view, a more expanded perspective can be gained by exploring the meaning behind this event.