Are free goods better than those you have to pay for?

A charity I once volunteered for was in the business, amongst other things, of providing literature to those who ordinarily wouldn't have access to it. People in developing countries could buy books on all manner of subjects. Key word: buy. A price was set according to the general wealth of people in the country, but a price there was, even for the truly destitute.

Why can this be seen as a good thing? If the charity wasn't doing it purely to cover their costs (which were far greater than anything they could make off just selling books)? Because it made the people value what they were receiving.

Each day, I have thrust upon me reams of pamphlets, newspapers, et al, none of which I particularly want, all of which are free. Frankly, I don't even appreciate it enough to wipe my arse with them (take heed, all ye accursed LondonLite distributors). But were I to sacrifice something to obtain them, even a fairly negligible pittance, each sheet would mean at least a little something to me.

Moving on from the realms of gratis processed tree carcass, let us use this as an analogy for rights. Writing with the Western world in mind, allusions and explicit references to our "right" to do X, Y or Z, are rife. We have laws and systems and beliefs that are designed to empower us, uphold and protect our rights in almost every conceivable area of life.

But most of us haven't had to sacrifice a damn thing for them.

How often do we think about our liberties and freedoms, outside of the context of a debate over the justifiability of a specific action? How much do we take for granted peoples' rights to (theoretically) do as they please, within the confines of not harming others? And how many rights are hence infringed upon (or outright abused); to what extent are they undervalued?

I wonder if the skewing of equal rights, largely due to overzealous, misguided political correctness, can be attributed in part to this phenomenon? Or, to approach from a slightly different angle, do we even want equal rights any more?

Free speech! (as long as you concur with the majority consensus re what is acceptable). Bloody Thought Police; never there when you need 'em, eh?

How is it possible - nay, permissible - that people get so caught up in correct terminology, cunning word-play and Being Universally Palatable, that the very essence of free speech (or the point of a debate) is lost in a soul-devouring vortex of facade and smarmy conjecture? Why, in the modern Western world, are there cries to gag those we disagree with?

Have my most cynical fears truly been realised? Have we really degenerated so far, as to be incapable of hearing another's puerile opinion without embracing it as our own, to the point where individuals are deemed to require silencing? Can we not be satisfied with offering up our own views and debating our differences, rather than demanding certain views not be aired?

How ironic that rights and anti-bigotry laws can now enhance the arsenal of the very stances they were supposed to oppose.