The Curious Cat is a journey where I aim to reconnect with my inner-child and explore my curiosity. I pinpoint themes & topics I’ve been interested in within the last 7 days, ask myself questions about them and then write about them. I hope you find value within this issue and have a fantastic day doing what you love.
I think censorship is of the most disgusting threats to our democracies. And so, I’m going to spend the next hour thinking about it; before I head for a €6 hour-long massage (jeeze I love South East Asia).
Tragically, the last 100 years left heaps of examples where limiting free speech led to suffering and ruin (the holocaust, Stalin’s purge and how Pol Pot was allowed to murder 1/3 of the Cambodian population. His Khmer Regime burnt 80% of Cambodian books and started a new calendar at Year 0, in an attempt to erase history). These memories should be fresh, and serve as warning signals to those who wish to slide down the slippery slope of censorship. Unbelievably, there are people (notably those with power) who still endorse censorship and the subsequent abolishment of speaking freely.
Around 12 months ago, the US Disinformation Governance Board was created. It was born with the objective to censor disinformation and become the Speech Police. Thanks to a leak that was released on Halloween, we now know that both Facebook and Twitter have been overtly working with them to police ‘disinformation.’ Sounds eerily similar to the Soviet Communist Party’s coalition with Pravda. Elon Musk has since confirmed that Twitter intentionally “interfered with elections.” The most murderous organisation in the world (US Government) secretly cooperating with the most powerful and influential companies in the world (Twitter & Facebook) definitely sounded some alarms in my head. That is why I write today’s post.
In the 1800s, the most popular way to share information was via Newspapers. So state governments befriended and infilitrated the likes of The Times and the New York Times in order to oversee narratives and public discourse.
In the 1900s, the most popular way to share information was via Radio and TV. So state governments befriended and infilitrated the likes of the BBC and CNN to oversee narratives and public discourse.
In the 2000s, the most popular way to share information is via the Internet. So state governments have befriended and infiltrated the likes of Facebook and Twitter in their attempt to continue controlling narratives and public discourse in the digital age.
The incredible thing is the Disinformation Board haven’t even defined what ‘disinformation’ is! The subjective and malleable nature of the word allows them to carefully select what content they do or do not want to be viewable; irrespective of its righteousness (eg: Facebook has removed 20-million posts since the start of the pandemic due to “COVID misinformation.” People who shared that Ivermectin can help fight COVID were silenced and had their content removed. We now know that the Speech Police were scientifically wrong as Ivermectin has efficiently stopped COVID on millions of occasions and was almost definitely targeted as it countered the need for vaccine mandates). Facebook also silenced users presenting the idea that COVID-19 might source from a leak from a laboratory. Given that we don’t yet know where COVID came from, it seems regressive and peculiar to ban someone who shares an idea; especially when that idea is rooted in rationality and endorsed by world-renowned healthcare experts.
The holy grail of modern-day democracy is the US Constitution - a doc written in 1787 - that set laws granting the Federal Government enough power to act on a national level, but not enough power to abuse human rights. The very first amendment of that doc states that every US citizen is free to express their opinion. Policymakers and Silicon Valley mustn’t have got that memo yet.
I’m hesitant to believe that the intention of governments is to stop harmful misinformation, as they so claim. The stories of Edward Snowden & Julian Assange show that their intentions are not to eradicate misinformation, but to eradicate information they don’t like. These two individuals revealed incredible truths; from the illegal torture facilities of Abu Ghraib to the NSA boasting the ability to access any phone or computer at a whim…illegally. And what’s the reward for revealing these monumental truths and crimes? Public humiliation and to be caged for the rest of their lives.
“Platforms have got to get comfortable with gov’t. It’s really interesting how hesitant they remain,” a leaked text from a former Official of the Department of Homeland Security
Today, censorship of speech is coming in two main forms
(1) Limiting speech and removing the freedom to talk due to potential misinformation
(2) Limiting speech and removing the freedom to talk due to hate speech
Users either get their posts pulled, or have their accounts deleted, forever silencing them within the digital town squares. The big issue for me is, who gets to decide? These things aren’t objective science; they’re totally opinionated. It’s arrogant, irresponsible and dangerous for those empowered to self-proclaim themselves as ultimate deciders of truth. Both instances imply that individuals are not able, or simply too stupid, to take care of themselves. The result? We need a big brother to make our decisions and filter the information we ingest. The question is:“in the conquest to minimise ‘disinformation,’ is it worth sacrificing core freedoms?” Policymakers and tech giants alike unfortunately think it is worth sacrificing freedoms.
To view the opposite perspective, I like the argument of “more information trumps bad information.” The more we silence, the harder it is to get the truth, and the easier it becomes to spread a chosen narrative. With more opinions and conversations, increased access boosts our chances of coming to the legitimate truth…rather than being drip-fed information by incompetent politicians.
I’ll leave you with a quote from Maajid Nawaz:
“When there’s no such thing as truth, you can’t define reality. When you can’t define reality, the only thing that matters is power.” – Maajid Nawaz