The ongoing revelations coming from Tulsi Gabbard and others raise the question of just how free Americans have been. And that answer is looking uglier by the day. We are seeing that the entire establishment including the so-called free press have been colluding to keep us all down on the plantation.
How free will we be moving forward into a future when there is a war being waged between those who would enslave us, who would dictate what we are allowed to think and say, and those who believe in the foundational values of this great country that we live in?
This century has been eye-opening for many reasons. Technological innovation has weakened institutional control over public opinion. The Internet has provided everyone with a pulpit to speak from. There is no shortage of forums on the Internet (think podcasts, blogs, comments sections, etc.). These have empowered regular people to question authorities in meaningful ways, in ways that were not available before. This has provided intrepid researchers with the ability to publish documentaries about things that governmental elites would prefer the people not know about. Institutional barriers are far lower than they used to be.
Perhaps the most important revelation that has come to light is the inescapable conclusion that Western governments are not at all committed to free speech. For many Westerners who lived through the Cold War, this has to come as something of a shock.
In the days of the Cold War, one of the principal items that supposedly separated the Soviet Union from the West, was that, in the Soviet Union, government apparatchiks constructed and disseminated official “truths.” In the West, a free press supposedly supplied us with the truth. The government did not have a monopoly on what ideas were permitted to be known by the public. One could argue about just how free that press was but the change during the last few decades is like the difference between night and day.
What do we see today? Western governments are falling all over themselves over so-called “disinformation” and “misinformation.” Free expression is a mirage in many western countries. People who pray silently outside abortion clinics are arrested and imprisoned. Hate speech laws prevent open public discourse about “sensitive” topics.
More and more European governments are openly embracing censorship and criminalizing speech. In Germany, the second largest political party, the AfD, are being legislated out of existence. Why? Because they do not follow the approved narratives for Germany’s political elites.
In France, the CNews reported that “a man was sentenced this Wednesday by the Lyon Criminal Court to one year in prison for burning a Quran in front of a mosque in Villeurbanne (Rhône) last June.” This is something that I might expect to happen in Iran or Hitler’s Germany. And, While I am not in favor of burning books at any time, why is it a crime to burn a book that you own? Apparently Western governments are now levying criminal charges for violating Islamic blasphemy rules. This case is another example in governments use backdoors to kill freedom of speech.
The proliferation of vaguely defined “hate speech” and “misinformation” laws, such as Europe’s Digital Services Act and now, in this country, California’s Defending Democracy Act, appear to enable foreign governments and left-leaning states to dictate what anyone can say online and that includes Americans. Let’s be reminded that Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have been big supporters of the Digital Services Act.
“The Digital Services Act is a blueprint for total narrative control in the digital age,” noted Jeremy Tedesco, senior counsel for the Alliance Defending Freedom. “The European view of speech is completely out of synch with what American constitutional standards permit,” he said. More than one left leaning US states are attempting to follow Europe’s lead.
In addition, there is an ongoing incremental push toward a regulated online system requiring authenticated digital identities. This includes the push towards digital currencies (CBDC’s) controlled by the government. This promises a future where only government-engineered narratives will be approved for public expression.
For those who lived through the Cold War, these attempts to classify information as “good” or “bad” stinks of Soviet communism. Hunting down “disinformation” was an obsession for the Soviets. Yet during the OBiden administration, there was an open attempt to create a government agency for disinformation and misinformation. This happened in America, the bastion of freedom and liberty, the “shining city on the hill.”
Whatever happened to this statement? “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it. “
There were no qualifications along the lines of, “…unless what you’re saying may be designated by the government as misinformation, disinformation, or toxic hate speech.”
Any government that claims to protect free speech while at the same time asserting the power to determine what kinds of ideas may be expressed is no better than the Soviets of yesteryear. A Digital Iron Curtain is no better than the proverbial Iron Curtain of old. And, in many ways, it may be worse.
To see Western governments adopt the same Soviet approach to controlling language is frightening. Of course, when governments jump in to police what can and cannot be said, they will always claim to be doing so for the public’s own good. Let’s be reminded that the tyranny of governments will always attempt to disguise itself as being for the benefit of all.
In the case of the Digital Services Act, the European Commission states it will “create a safer digital space in which the fundamental rights of all users of digital services are protected.” Its defenders say it blocks illegal or harmful content and only applies to EU countries. Who defines what is illegal or harmful? In Germany, this can even include insults.
A member of the European Parliament, Virginie Joron, called the Digital Services Act “a Trojan horse for surveillance and control.”
Where do we go from here? Most western governments are doubling down on coercion. In the UK, PM Starmer has ordered moving towards a digital ID system.
The prime minister is portraying the introducing of a universal digital ID system as a way of tackling illegal immigration and improving the delivery of public services. Starmer says he wants to transform the relationship between citizens and the state. I have little doubt that this is true. However, this “fundamental transformation” will not be for the benefit of the public.
Starmer is hiding behind a housing crisis and rampant crime committed by illegal aliens to push this through. Of course, this is just an attempt to tighten the government’s grip over the public. There probably would not be a housing crisis if illegal immigration was under control. And, in America, we have already seen a significant drop in violent crime as illegal aliens are expelled from the country. Has Starmer considered this approach? Beware the wolf in sheep’s clothing.
This is just one of many examples in the West. There is a war going on to determine what western civilization should look like. It concerns the public’s right to reject the political elite’s narratives and determine its own future. It concerns a basic question: What does it mean to be a free country? The totalitarians want to define that.
Either citizens will reclaim control over their governments, or governments will succeed in silencing their citizens. There is no third choice.