Free speech and rise of State tyranny

The rise of independent journalism facilitated by burgeoning internet platforms continues to enrich the diversity of perspectives and discussions within public discourse.

However, this burgeoning plurality is regarded as a problem by governments and traditional media establishments. In the aftermath of the Covid-19 pandemic, governments have exerted a form of authoritarian control, ostensibly justified by the need to combat “misinformation”, “disinformation”, and “conspiracy theories”.

Authorities pushed their citizens to accept without question narratives espoused by figures such as Dr Anthony Fauci, the then US Director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases. It has come to light that Western governments collaborated with technology behemoths like Meta and Google to engage in censorship, deplatforming, suppression, or shadow banning of individuals expressing skepticism or dissent regarding official government stances on crucial matters, including the virus’s origin, spread, and control.

Government officials and democrats often enjoyed immunity from making dubious, unsubstantiated claims. On the other hand, conservatives often found themselves disproportionately targeted, facing swift deplatforming for minor infractions such as liking or retweeting a meme or a post, under the guise of “violating community guidelines”. The zealous desire to tightly control information related to Covid was unmistakable, with a complete lack of tolerance for dissenting viewpoints. Government-sanctioned narratives were elevated to a sacrosanct status, surpassing, in some sense, revered religious texts like the Bible in their perceived authority. While individuals are free to question the Bible’s infallibility, they were not permitted to second-guess Fauci.

Shameless

The enforcers of information clampdown were unabashedly shameless in their tactics — censoring and eventually deplatforming a sitting American president, Donald J Trump for expressing personal views on the pandemic. This unprecedented move underscored the extent to which the suppression of divergent opinions became a stark reality in the realm of information dissemination.

The orchestrated campaigns to inundate the public with State propaganda bear an unsettling resemblance to medieval Europe, where books presenting alternative viewpoints were often consigned to flames, and independent thinkers and skeptics faced persecution and death.

The parallel becomes even more pronounced in the targeting and ostracisation of President Trump, orchestrated by tech companies with the apparent support of the Biden Administration.

This scenario draws a poignant comparison to the plight of Ahmed Salman Rushdie, an author forced into exile and hiding for publishing the “Satanic Verses”. The irony is stark: the West, which once offered refuge to Rushdie, was now implicated in attempts to silence not only Trump but also thousands of individuals who resisted compliant engagement with state-sponsored propaganda.

Such actions raise profound questions about the preservation of free speech and the safeguarding of diverse perspectives in societies that ostensibly champion liberal values.

Media outlets were not the sole collaborators in this ominous agenda; financial institutions too were entrenched in it. In the UK, Nigel Farage, a prominent British broadcaster, and former politician who led the UK Independence Party (UKIP), experienced the closure of his NatWest Bank account, due to his support of President Trump and his personal views on the controversial Covid vaccine.

In Canada, banks acting at the behest of an authoritative government of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau took the extraordinary step of freezing bank accounts of truckers that were protesting vaccine mandates and other stringent Covid measures. This collusion — between mainstream media, tech companies, financial institutions, and governmental powers — not only restricted the flow of information but also extended its reach to stifling dissent and punishing individuals for their political and medical viewpoints.

Escalating censorship

Concerned by the escalating censorship and constraints on free expression, South African-born entrepreneur, Elon Musk, voiced his apprehensions regarding the erosion of civil liberties. In a surprising move, Musk suggested that he could acquire Twitter and transform it into a public square of unrestricted free speech. This unexpected proposal caught both Twitter and the government off-guard. In response, the Twitter Board of Directors employed the poison-pill maneuver in a futile attempt to thwart Musk's potential purchase.

Musk eventually acquired Twitter, renamed it X, and turned it into a platform of unrestricted free speech. Regrettably, this has come at a person cost to Musk. Major corporations advocating for censorship have ceased advertising on X, citing dubious claims of antisemitic views as a pretext. President Biden is alleged to have said that Musk’s “cooperation and/or technical relationships with other countries” warrant scrutiny. Indeed, there is reported heightened regulatory scrutiny of Musk’s companies, leading to the loss of lucrative government contracts and subsidies. The EU has also initiated an investigation into X for “potential dissemination of terrorist content, violent material, and hate speech”.

This apparent determination to crash Elon Musk and defeat his endeavors mirrors an unsettling trend that resembles authoritarian tactics seen in Communist China or North Korea, where control over information and dissent is prioritised over the principles of free expression and open discourse.

Mr Chesoli is a New York-based development economist and global policy expert. [email protected]