Recently there have been at least two important studies revealing the increase of censorship in countries considered to be democracies. It is an alarming trend, but not altogether surprising, as recent years have given evidence that populism and undemocratic behavior go hand in hand. I am not only referring to Donald Trump screaming like a punk about Section 230; the United Kingdom, France, and Australia are other examples of places where censorship rears its ugly head. No one of sound character would doubt the necessity of restricting the availability of cruel, gorey, and content broadly considered to be obscene. At issue is a lower level of offensiveness associated with political and religious expression.
We do, in fact need to be able to discuss and even argue about political or religious subjects, including artistic expressions of dissent. When that is restricted, it is a step threatening all freedom of expression. What do I hear? "It was a small infringement?" Small, as a small turd or dead fly contaminates the whole soup. Go ahead and drink, if you dare...
For reference, take some time now and read the report entitled, Extremely aggressive’ internet censorship spreads in the world’s democracies. After that, without delay, read How Google Firing Timnit Gebru Was an Act of Research Censorship. Governments and corporations are very wrong if they think they win a debate if there actually is no debate. Facts matter. Right and wrong matter. Justice matters, if you want peace. It is like a poker game: you do not win unless you put your cards down in opposition to your opponent. No win without skin in the game.
People, what are you made of? What position are you going to take? I pose the queston as a challenge and suggest you decide which side you will take, because there is no credit for sitting in the middle. No creds for being a fence sitter. When the shit hits the fan, fence sitters will be spattered along with everyone else. Make your shit spattering worth something.