Free speech versus the new Thought Police

It seems more and more countries around the world are pushing back on Big Tech giants Facebook and Twitter, the new Thought Police, who think they have more power to control free speech than governments. I heartily applaud Australia, India, Hungary, and Poland for standing up to these modern-day monopolistic robber barons who make huge fortunes selling our data on their “free” platforms (you’re not their customer, you’re their product!). But why isn’t the United States following suit since these self-appointed arbiters of free speech come from our very shores? Why do we continue to protect them with legislation instead (U.S. Code 230)? The whole thing is just insane to me.

At least other countries are waking up to the insanity. The Epoch Times reported in a recent article, “Poland Proposes $13.5 Million Fines for Tech Giants Engaging in Ideological Censorship” the following:

“Poland could implement massive fines for tech giants who censor users or remove posts for ideological reasons, according to the country’s Deputy Minister of Justice Sebastian Kaleta.”

“Freedom of speech is not something that anonymous moderators working for private companies should decide,” Kaleta said.”

“Instead, that is for the national body; duly elected officials and all industries, car, phones, finance, were unregulated till they grew too large; the same should happen with Big Tech.”

“Freedom of speech is not something that anonymous moderators working for private companies should decide.” Imagine that! Common sense clarity from a national leader in assessing this monster that has been unleashed on the free world.

According to the ET article, Hungary is also looking to reign in Big Tech’s overreach:

“Hungary is also following Poland in the fight against social media censorship, with Justice Minister Judit Varga last month stating that Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government will not tolerate intrusions on free speech.”

“She alleged that she herself had also been “shadow-banned” by Facebook, and complained that mainstream social media sites “limit the visibility of Christian, conservative, right-wing opinions” and accused “power groups behind global tech giants’ of having the power to decide elections.”

We witnessed these “power groups behind global tech giants…having power to decide elections” in our own 2020 election. Of course, those allegations were quickly swept down the “memory hole” with threats to cancel anyone, even heads of state, who dare bring them up again.

The Right Scoop reported in their recent article, “Australia takes on Big Tech, so Facebook blocks ALL news stories from Australia for the entire world,” the following:

“Australia is now pushing Big Tech to make deals with news publishers after a recently released 18-month report from their Australian Competition & Consumer Commission. They want these Big Tech companies to pay news agencies for content that appears on their platforms and they also want to break their dominance and thus their censorship.”

Google is working out a deal with the Australian government, but Facebook arrogantly retaliated by banning all Australian news agencies on their platform! This included banning anyone outside of Australia from sharing Australian news. Australia’s Prime Minister, Scott Morrison, responded:

“Facebook’s actions to unfriend Australia today, cutting off essential information services on health and emergency services were as arrogant as they were disappointing.

These actions will only confirm the concerns that an increasing number of countries are expressing about the behaviour of BigTech companies who think they are bigger than governments and that the rules should not apply to them.

They may be changing the world, but that doesn’t mean they run it.”

Apparently, Zuckerberg thinks he does run the world.

As a result of this insanely arrogant response by Facebook, thousands of Australians are deleting their accounts. But did you ever dream in your wildest imagination that private companies (under U.S. legislative protection) would be so dictatorial that they would think it’s okay to block an entire country’s news agencies? These fat-cat Big Tech billionaires have lost touch with reality! But this is what happens when our own government actually protects them from legal repercussions.

These self-appointed global arbiters of free speech also recently blocked the Facebook page of Nigerian’s leader, Nnamdi Kanu. You read about that here.

But India’s leaders would not be bullied by Twitter’s hypocritical cancellation policies (see article here). Twitter CEO, Jack Dorsey, basically told the Indian government that he can do whatever he wants because he has the right to free speech. But Dorsey thinking he is above the law wasn’t going to be tolerated by the Indian government:

“India’s government has threatened to punish employees at Twitter with fines and jail terms of up to seven years for restoring hundreds of accounts it has ordered the company to block. Most accounts were critical of the country’s prime minister, Narendra Modi.”

The government also pushed back against Twitter’s “free speech” argument saying that the company had no “constitutional, statutory or legal basis whatsoever” to interpret what constituted free speech under Indian laws.”

All these stories more and more countries pushing back on the Big Tech Thought Police are encouraging because it’s so frustrating to see our own feckless leadership do nothing to stop them. But the real remedy will be when someone develops better social media that actually protects free speech and renders obsolete these parasitical companies that feed off of us while censoring anything that doesn’t agree with their political ideology.

One promising solution on the horizon is using Blockchain technology in social media (see article: “Benefits of using Blockchain Technology in Social Media.”)

About Mel Wild

God's favorite (and so are you), a son and a father, happily married to the same beautiful woman for 40 years. We have three incredible adult children. My passion is pursuing the Father's heart in Christ and giving it away to others. My favorite pastime is being iconoclastic and trailblazing the depths of God's grace. I'm also senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in Wisconsin.
This entry was posted in Freedom and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Free speech versus the new Thought Police

  1. christinewjc says:

    I recently saw a video where the host mentioned how upset the Polish are about seeing big tech platform censorship here in the US. Being of Polish decent, I was pleased to hear about this. My grandparents immigrated from Poland to America. The fact that the Polish people suffered under Communist rule for 45 years tells us that they have known tyranny, and hate to see it rearing its ugly head here in our beloved America!

    🙏🏻 For the reversal of this “cancel culture” hatred here in America. People need to wake up!

    • Mel Wild says:

      That’s a really good point about the Polish who’ve witnessed this type of tyranny firsthand under Communist rule. I have Christian friends from former Soviet-block countries and other countries run by Socialist dictators who are appalled by what’s happening to the United States. They can’t believe we’re letting the very thing they escaped from happen here. Yes, the American people, regardless of party affiliation, DO need to wake up! Of course, they won’t hear any of this from the mainstream media or Big Tech because it’s already being censored and memory holed.

    • Mel Wild says:

      Here’s something timely to our conversation, Christine. An op-ed piece just came in from The Epoch Times: “US Should Emulate Poland on Fining Big Tech Censors.” Amen. Yes, we should! 🙂

      • christinewjc says:


        Does that section? 230 deal prohibit fining of these big tech social media owners? If so, like President Trump said, it needs to go! Why should these biased, rich, so-called “elites” get away with this?

        • Mel Wild says:

          From what I understand, Section 230 protects Big Tech companies from being sued for the content users post on their sites. Not sure if it stops people from other countries fining them or people suing them for unfair trade practices (like Parler did). The law was also never meant for them to hide behind so they would be free to sway elections and cancel anyone who disagrees with their political ideology. It certainly needs to be legally challenged.

  2. bwcarey says:

    for a very long time the world has been slipping away from it’s moral responsibilities, and most politicians have been riding the gravy train if your honest, so the meritocracy that could have been never was, we are now in a drought of goodness, so the politico’s, trying to hold onto their food basket, the voter, have suddenly found a conscience if you want to be honest, amen. The problems ARE not the extreme we think them to be, the balance of life has to change, it’s obvious to a child, but then again, this was the Prophecy of old, amen, listening without prejudice is needed, amen

    • Mel Wild says:

      It is truly a time for a balancing out. The culture has gotten so out of whack (for decades) by the dominance of, really, a minority of people who have managed to dominate the media outlets, big tech social media, education, big corporations, and politics. Those would oppose their reprehensible moral actions, and who systematically are taking away our freedoms, kept silent. But the “balancing out” is starting to happen as good people are waking up and pushing back and building alternative platforms, institutions of education, corporations, and new political voices are rising up. God is at work. 🙂

  3. pkadams says:

    I’m thrilled to see this push-back! The world is dividing into two groups before our eyes. Freedom and Totalitarian. I wish I knew how to find out how many people have left Facebook .I know many have since the election. I am on MeWe now but I didn’t completely leave FB.

    • Mel Wild says:

      Yeah, some interesting battle lines have been drawn. But it’s not the traditional ones at all. It’s not about democrats versus republicans, conservatives against liberals, even religious against humanists or atheists. It’s freedom lovers versus the totalitarian radical left, as you said. Or, as Dave Rubin put it, “It’s everyone versus the Woke.”

      What’s ironic is that this really is bringing people together (against the insane woke policies being forced down our throat) where there was great division before. As it turns out, most people hate cancel culture. And that’s a very encouraging thing, indeed!

  4. Good stuff, Mel, some encouraging news for a change.

    • Mel Wild says:

      Yes, it truly is encouraging. Things are starting to shift. People are getting fed up with woke politics and cancel culture being forced upon us. I think we’ll see some surprising changes for the better in the next few years, but there will be a lot frustratingly insane things, too.

  5. LightWriters says:

    Thank you, Mel. Robber barons indeed. May the Lord give His people the boldness of David a d these ‘Goliath(s)’ of our times be slain. 🙏♥️🙏

  6. Just watched the film, The Social Delima. Very well worth viewing. On this same topic. Non-political. Talks about how our social platforms have manipulated us into thinking the way they want us to think. They did an amazing job in conveying this 1984ish phenomenon!

    • Mel Wild says:

      I’ll have to watch it! I hadn’t heard of it before. And this issue really is way beyond politics. The social media platforms polarize us, putting us in our own ideological echo chambers, using algorithms to keep us divided. As I mentioned in the post, we’re not Facebook and Twitter’s customers, we’re their product! That’s why they offer it for free. They feed off of us like the machines in the Matrix movie, using our “data” to sell to the marketplace. This is what made them the new robber-baron billionaires. Now, because of our willingness to be used this way, they currently have the monopoly on controlling thought and speech. Even more than governments.

      Btw, I found the Netflix movie trailer here. I’m definitely watching it. Thanks!

  7. Pingback: The Social Dilemma | In My Father's House

  8. hermitsdoor says:

    The more we read, the less we trust… institutions, political and business leaders, the media, social media, friends or trolls… While the digital world allows us to connect with people, whom geography would keep us separate, we have so much doubt about what those people’s (assuming they are actual people) beliefs, intentions, and experiences really are. Even the Pope’s Instagram account is not really written and posted by the Pope, but by some Pope-handler who wants to present an image of the Pope (whom I happen to l like but this is irrelevant for the discussion). While I do observe our distorted world of news and social media, I keep a skeptical distance from repeating information for which I have no verification (unless I reference where I got the data, such as you have with the Epoch Times, here). Rather, I have conversations with real people, in real space, and real time. There our speech can be free, because we can ask questions, clarify statements, and judge their intent directly. -Oscar

    • Mel Wild says:

      You make some really good points here, Oscar. We lose about 93% of communication when we only use verbal speech or text. We lose the facial expressions, body language, inflections, etc., which is why social media has made us poor communicators. Not to mention, the algorithms that manipulate us. And you’re right about leaders not even writing their own tweets. It’s just the talking points, no real communication.

      I’m glad you brought up the importance of asking questions and clarifying. This is critically important if we’re going to ever be a healthy culture. The danger we have with cancel culture’s intolerance of opposing views is that it does not allow for the processing of ideas in the marketplace. Most new ideas begin as radical ideas, but then when they are pushed back on and even criticized, they move toward the middle and become useful to society as a whole. But when ideas are not allowed to be expressed in the marketplace, all you’re left with is radical ideas from the group that has control over the narrative. All this is doing is making an already polarized society more divided, more angry, and more radicalized (on both sides). This is why cancel culture is like a cancer to society.

      • hermitsdoor says:

        National Parks were pretty radical when John Muir advocated them, and President (Teddy) Roosevelt proposed the scheme. WV has just added the New River Gorge as the 63rd of these (we spent a week there this summer after 4 months of working not he Covid units at our hospital). Who would consider a National Park radical today. Let’s not toss out every idea that scars us. Let’s take some time to consider the options. Thanks for you perspective. -Oscar

  9. Pingback: Just what do you mean by unity? | In My Father's House

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.