Freedom of opinion protects conclusions, but never premises. This is the central thesis defended in the article, which establishes a fundamental distinction between what can be said freely and what cannot be invented.
The article states that every person has the right to be pro-Russian, Putinist, communist, illiberal or to hold any position they understand, being able to express it publicly without answering to anyone. This freedom of conclusion is protected.
However, the article maintains that what was never included in this right was the freedom to invent the premise from which one starts. That is, one cannot create facts or false premises to sustain an argument.
The text concludes that facts are not the property of whoever argues, but rather the common ground where the argument is disputed. Whoever falsifies premises, therefore, is not exercising freedom of opinion, but manipulating the very foundation of the debate.
