Censorship and the Battle for Free Speech

Escalating Censorship

There is a growing impatience among censors. From merely disliking free speech and exploiting the system to their advantage, they are now fantasizing about abolishing it through criminal penalties. This change in attitude, from frustration to anger to advocating for violent solutions, has been noticeable over the past few weeks. It's a reminder that censorship was never the ultimate goal. The real objective has always been to control society's "cognitive infrastructure", or how we think, to secure a monopoly on political power.

Disinformation as a Tool for Control

This week, Fox reporter Peter Doocy was engaged in a heated exchange with the White House spokesperson over whether FEMA is funding migrants while being unable to assist American storm survivors. The spokesperson quickly labeled this as "disinformation." When Doocy asked which part of his question was disinformation, the spokesperson vaguely referred to the overall context of the question. This incident highlights how the term "disinformation" is being used to shut down unwelcome premises or facts.

Calls for Criminal Penalties

Only a few days after this incident, Hillary Clinton suggested imposing criminal penalties for disinformation. Meanwhile, former presidential candidate John Kerry claimed that the existence of free speech is making government impossible. Vice President Kamala Harris has also pledged to hold social media accountable for the "hate infiltrating their platforms." These statements reflect a growing frustration among the ruling class, who seem to be losing their patience with dissenting voices.

The Threat to Free Thought

The ruling class seems to be increasingly disturbed by the free exchange of ideas on the internet. They appear to be intent on controlling the digital age, forcing it into a version of 1970s television with limited channels and controlled content. This desire for control is reminiscent of the character Violet Venable in Tennessee Williams's play Suddenly, Last Summer. Violet, a wealthy widow, is willing to go to extreme lengths to maintain her delusions about the world, even if it means subjecting her niece to a lobotomy to suppress the truth.

The Censorship of Dissent

While we have only experienced a relatively mild version of this censorship so far, there are signs that the ruling class is willing to go much further. YouTube accounts have been demonetized and deleted, Facebook posts have been throttled and banned, and LinkedIn's algorithms punish posts that challenge regime narratives. The ultimate goal appears to be to shut down the internet completely. They would have done so by now if not for the First Amendment, which stands in their way.

Political Persecution of Dissenters

Another strategy being employed is the political persecution of dissenters. Alex Jones, Steve Bannon, and the protestors on January 6 have all been targeted for landing on the wrong side of the regime. The Covid vaccine mandates, too, seem to be less about health and more about excluding those who do not fully trust authority. The mask mandates, despite lacking scientific evidence, serve as a visible sign to separate believers from non-believers.

The Final Means of Censorship

The ultimate form of censorship is violence against person and property, with the aim of controlling what you think to ensure one-party rule. Major tech companies and major media are complicit in this endeavor. Only a handful of services are resisting this, and they are all being targeted by the regime through various forms of lawfare.

The Irony of Censorship

In the final scenes of Suddenly, Last Summer, Catherine finally recalls the horrifying details of her cousin’s death and tells family members the truth. Aunt Violet cannot handle it and resorts to denial and disinformation. The irony is that every claim that Violet made against Catherine eventually applies to Violet herself. The person who wanted to use violence to suppress the truth was merely protecting herself against a truth that she could not handle.

The Role of Archive.org

As this article is being published, the website archive.org has been down for the better part of a week, supposedly due to a catastrophic failure. This is concerning because the website serves as a verified memory of what was posted when. Without it, vast amounts of the history of the last quarter century could be deleted. The entire contents of the web could be rewritten as vaporware, here one moment, gone the next. This raises the question: Will the Internet be lobotomized? If not this time, could it happen in the future?

Bottom Line

The escalating censorship and the battle for free speech raise serious questions about the future of our society. Will we continue to value and protect free speech, or will we allow it to be suppressed in the name of control? What do you think about this issue? Share this article with your friends and join the conversation. Don't forget to sign up for the Daily Briefing, every day at 6pm.