The UK Labour government appears to be more worried about X than the Pakistani Grooming Gangs which were aided and abetted by multiple levels of government and law enforcement who were terrified of being called ‘racist’.
Their panic over X and subsequent threats to ban the social media platform probably have nothing, whatsoever, to do with X being instrumental in whistle-blowing the Grooming Gang scandal and seriously embarrassing the Labour leadership…
Nor does it have anything to do with the collapse of Covid tyranny and revelations about government and corporate mismanagement which took place during the pandemic. Previously, governments sent thousands of official requests to social media companies to silence the victims of vaccine injury and lockdown laws. X published these demands, showing the world just how far governments were prepared to go to silence their victims. Something governments have not apologised for.
And of course, it doesn’t have anything to do with shutting up public dissent over the Climate Change narrative which is worth over $1 trillion every year to very powerful corporations and governments. It is co-incidence, we’re sure, that climate change dissent is cited in multiple pieces of legislation across the West as an example of harmful and dangerous rhetoric found on social media platforms.
It’s not like social media platforms were previously forced to uphold censorial policies about renewable technology and climate change science which saw people banned for discussing what is, essentially, a policy portfolio.
And they definitely didn’t ban ads along political climate policy lines, nope!
Governments and their censorship departments would never seek to take down actual live news events, such as religiously motivated public stabbings. They would not accuse social media of monetising violence while mainstream media, friendly to legacy political parties, has fed off violent news reports since the first printing press clicked into action. That would be crippling hypocrisy.
And those departments would not brand criticism, rejection, and satirisation of LGBTQ activism or trans ideology as hate speech. It is beyond comprehension to think our government would stoop so low as to consider biological reality and women’s safety hateful or the protection of children from permanent physical alteration as dangerously far-right.
We would never be able to envision a world where rejecting Islam as an alternate religion, telling the truth about third-world cultural practices, or even complaining about radical Islamic terror attacks wouldn’t be cause for online censorship. And this would not be considered a new form of thought crime under the definition of a blasphemy-adjacent definition of Islamophobia.
Laughable, surely, to suggest that the rise of an anti-Christian, anti-freedom, anti-democratic, theologically extreme system of government which has toppled nations around the world and serves as the leading form of all global terror, could be considered a phobia instead of common sense.
Watching it shake hands with hardcore communism? That’s probably fine.
And how dare anyone take to social media platforms to complain that mass migration and Marxist cultural erasure are policies undeniably linked to the housing crisis, cost-of-living crisis, and general loss of national identity. Blaming mass migration for anything is racist, apparently.
At the moment, citizens of the West are using X to show that public opinion does not sit with Parliamentary majorities.
Decades of uni-party behaviour, in which oppositions and governments run the same party line and enact nation-changing policy without consent, has led to a revolutionary mindset.
What do weak governments do in the face of public criticism? Ban things. Threaten people. Tell them to shut up. Make excuses for unreasonable infringes on human rights.
Banning X is something the Ayatollah in Iran would do.
Something Xi Jinping’s mentally fragile communist regime does.
Something the intellectually hostile necrocracy of North Korea does.
Something the collapsing EU wants to do as right-wing politics flips its member states.
Something Keir Starmer wants to do seeing as he can’t control the nation’s borders, budget, or crime wave.
And possibly something mulling over in the mind of Albanese and Ley, two individuals whose political parties view social media as the perpetual enemy to their dreadful policy thought bubbles.
Why is One Nation rising? Better ban social media instead of fixing our policies! That ought to do it! Cross-party support!
There is no point going through the detail of the latest charges levelled at Grok and X.
Why? Because people were fooled once with the ‘We’re just protecting the children!’ excuse despite our detailed attempts to explain what was going on.
Government hostility toward X has nothing to do with children. Nothing to do with safety. Nothing to do with anything other than self-preservation.
The sins levelled at Grok are present in other AI image generation platforms and have been possible in pretty much all image editing software for 20 years. Cartoonists will be able to do the same thing until pens are outlawed.
Remember, it was only a few months ago when the worst and most violent speech was not found on X, but on left-leaning competing social media platforms suspiciously absent from government outrage.
We need to stop giving censorious politicians the benefit of the doubt.
Stop engaging in their irrational and disingenuous excuses for censorship.
And start telling them, ‘No!’
‘No!’ without any room for negotiation.
These attacks on the public forum and digital realm have got to stop and if conservatives cannot find it within themselves to lead the charge, then there is little hope we’ll have a concept of freedom by the time this decade ends.
