The loss of free speech means the end of democracy (Picture source)
A very dangerous and worrying trend, which has been gathering momentum for some time, has entered a new dimension in recent weeks. Political and business leaders around the world are blatantly calling for the censorship on reporting and discussing news in terms that are 'unhelpful' to their aims and ambitions along with further restrictions on free speech.
In the allegedly democratic nations of the developed world, such moves have to be announced in subtle and nuanced terms, otherwise enough punters might become aware of what is going on to trigger unrest and civil disobedience. Obama, Cameron, Hollande, Merkel and company cannot simply announce that they hate the internet because it is full of nasty, stupid ingrates who disagree with their policies. We saw the tactic of dressing restrictions on freedom as moves to protect the population from imaginary evil doers at the (UK) Conservative Party last week when a conference speech called for "non-violent” extremism to be banned from public discourse.
To their eternal shame, the serried ranks of mainstream media press release regurgitators could not find one single voice to ask, "And how do you define "non violent extremism"? Anyone who disagrees with government policy? Anyone who says, and backs up their claim with solid scientific reasoning, that climate change is just a scam to justify raising taxes? People who argue against globalism or point out correctly that the demands of gays and lesbians to be granted privileged status are nothing to do with human rights? People who insist immigrants must be subject to the same laws are born Britons and not the laws of their nation of origin? People who take to the streets to protest against our spineless government's following another corrupt and amoral U S President into another pointless and unwinnable middle eastern war?
We reported this frightening move in a recent Daily Stirrer post: 'DEATH OF DEMOCRACY IN THE UK: Coalition Government Passes Gagging Act'.
That may be how British politicians (and make no mistake, Labour and The Liberal Democrats are singing off the same totalitarian, globalist songsheet as the Conservatives,) sell the idea of authoritarianism. In Turkey, a nation hoping to join the EU in the next enlargement which will take the Union into Asia and Africa, political leaders have no qualms about admitting their disdain for the proliferation of free speech that the internet allows. We learn from The Independent:
The Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdo?an has defended his government's efforts to control online speech, telling a press freedom conference: "I am increasingly against the Internet every day.”
Mr Erdogan's comments came during an "unprecedented” meeting with the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) and the International Press Institute (IPI).
Local newspapers and major publications such as The New York Times and CNN International were among those slammed by officials, according to the CPJ.
"Media should never have been given the liberty to insult,” Mr Erdogan was quoted as saying during the 90-minute meeting.
He also expressed concern that criminal and terrorist organizations such as the Islamic State go online to recruit followers, saying he is "increasingly against” the internet.
His remarks come after he approved a law tightening control of the internet and increasing the powers held by telecoms authorities earlier in September.
In Egypt, another non European nation being seduced into the EU with promises that European lifestyles for its 90 million mostly poor, Muslim citizens can be funded by the munificence of EU taxpayers, they fear that civil society, only recently freed from the oppression of the Murbarack regime will be silenced again as opposition grows to the new military dictatorship. Associated Press reports:
Civil society groups in Egypt long had a tenuous position under the rule of autocrat Hosni Mubarak, but they were able to operate. Now those groups, ranging from human rights defenders to advocates of economic justice, fear even that margin of freedom is disappearing and that they are on the way to being silenced.
The government of newly elected President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi has ordered non-governmental organizations to submit to regulations that gives the state sweeping authority over their activities and financing — and dangles over them the threat of prosecution if they violate vague guidelines against "hurting national security" or "affecting public morals."
Further adding to the worries, el-Sissi last month revised the penal code to impose a life prison sentence against anyone who requests or receives funding from abroad with the aim of "harming national interests." Human rights groups and other non-governmental organizations — many of which receive international funding — warn that the broad phrasing could be used against them.
Egypt's civil society groups had once hoped that the country's 2011 revolution that ousted Mubarak would give them greater freedom to operate. However, el-Sissi has repeatedly said that while he would like to bring greater democracy, rights and liberties cannot be allowed to undermine his goal of bringing stability to a country in turmoil. El-Sissi, as Egypt's military chief at the time, removed the elected Islamist President Mohammed Morsi last year and launched a crackdown against Islamists that has expanded to other critics of the government.
Worries among non-governmental organizations were sparked when they were ordered to register by Nov. 10 under a Mubarak-era law regulating such groups. The law gives the government and security agencies sweeping authority over staffing decisions, activists and funding. It also forbids the organizations to conduct activities that affect "public morals, order or unity" — vague terms that could be used to stop many NGO operations, particularly those by human rights groups.
"Operating under the current law is impossible," said Mohammed Zaree, the Egypt program manager for the Cairo Institute for Human Rights Studies.
On one level this trend of politicians waging war on free speech is a major concern to all who believe in freedom and demcracy, from another perspective it is encouraging. The powers that be would not feel any need to remove the kid gloves and handle freethinkers roughly if they were not afraid the oiks have sussed their global totalitarian government agenda and actually speaking truth to each other.
Globalism and the threat to free speech
The importance of free speech and a free press
Oh Brave New World as technology and control freakery threaten freedom
Lack of diversity aids imposition of conformity and suppression of freedoms
Now everything you do is a symptom of mental illness
The authoritarian tide flowing from the left
Illiberal Liberals and the hypocrisy of the left
The tyranny of human rights