History is often taught as a succession of events. Our textbooks were filled with timelines, and we learned to place events on the lines in the correct order. As elementary students, however, we didn’t have a long perspective on time. Everything before we were born was, in a sense, ancient history. And because of my age, it seemed that history ended with World War II. Our history books presented that war, which ended just before I was born, as the culmination of history. We learned a few dates assigned as beginnings and endings.

I now realize, however, that beginnings and endings are not fixed points in time. Wars break out in response to specific events on specific dates, but they are often rooted in events that occurred long before combatants met on the battlefield. Ideas rarely have a single point of origin. When I taught faith formation leadership, I tried to help students understand that religion and education were inextricably intertwined. I would speak briefly of John Dewey and the rise of public education in the United States, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, but I would also teach about the origins of the Sunday School movement in the 18th century as a philanthropic effort to provide literacy education to poor children who worked in factories all week and had no other opportunities for school.

There isn’t a single date for the beginning of the concept of creating schools to teach children. Sometimes, ideas and concepts evolve slowly over many generations of thinkers. Way before the idea of public schools was first promoted, the concepts that laid the foundation for public education were being formed. One of the changes in thinking was the translation of the Christian Bible into common languages in the 13th century. As people began to hear the ideas of the bible in common languages, they began to think of themselves in new ways. The idea that each person is infused with the image of God is a very ancient concept, and it took centuries for it to become part of the common understanding.

As people began to think of God’s image within each individual, it became possible to consider individuals as capable of developing that image. People possess within themselves resources that, when developed, can empower them to learn and grow. Whether or not this change in thinking was prompted by the translation of biblical texts from Latin into common languages is unclear. Still, after a few years, new philosophies began to emerge.

Historians refer to the eighteenth century as the Age of Enlightenment. It is unclear whether new ideas were emerging at a more rapid pace. Still, it was during that time that European philosophers began to publish ideas that underpinned a rise in the demand for individual liberty. The American and French Revolutions emerged from specific political events, but they also stemmed from the growth of new ways of thinking.

One of the concepts that had been mulling for a long time was the concept of “Bildung.” The German word first appeared in early translations of the Bible from Latin to German. It has to do with the image of God in individuals. German poets and philosophers picked it up in the late 18th century. Among those was Wilhelm von Humboldt, who proposed the structure of modern education, beginning with primary school and continuing through to university. Humboldt published an essay called “Theory of Bildung,” in which he proposes that educational systems can be formed that encourage the emergence of wisdom and well-being for all people, not just the elite. The shift of focus to the development of personality as opposed to simply learning a trade gave rise to the idea that learning has its own intrinsic value. Beyond merely memorizing facts, students learn about their innate ability to ask questions, conduct research, and form their own opinions.

Influenced by Humboldt’s concepts, John Dewey would later write, “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.”

While those philosophical and educational ideas were emerging, modern governments were also developing. An educated population is capable of participating in self-governance. Democracy becomes possible.

We have inherited generations of layers of ideas and concepts that shape how we think of ourselves and the world. However, the emergence of new ideas does not erase existing ones. Alongside ideas of individual liberty and potential are ideas of classism and notions that not all people are equal. By the middle of the 20th century, Eric Fromm was writing about the fear of freedom and the human tendency to accept authoritarian systems, even when they are aware that greater freedom is possible.

We must understand the current debate about freedom of expression within the context of centuries of evolving ideas and perspectives. Ours is not the first generation where ideas, often expressed in humor, have been perceived as threats to those in power. It is not a mistake that freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom to assemble, and freedom to petition are ensconced in the First Amendment of the US Constitution. The Bill of Rights was adopted in 1791 in the context of the rich development of philosophy and education.

Understanding the potential of each individual and their capacity to learn and grow is essential to the development of a charter of fundamental rights. This complex intertwining of ideas, philosophies, educational systems, and government continues in the debates and arguments of our time. Fundamental rights are not absolute. One individual’s expression of freedom cannot be allowed to constrain another’s expression. It comes as no surprise to students of the history of philosophy that politicians who campaigned on protecting specific freedoms rush to constrain those freedoms as soon as they come into power. The one who shouts the loudest may not be expressing the most important ideas.

History has repeatedly demonstrated that ideas cannot be suppressed. Leaders who seek to silence critics don’t stop ideas from circulating. Those in power might succeed in taking the comedian off the air, but they won’t change the reality that the joke is still on them.