Left-wing and censorship: the ideological reason for so much fear of freedom of speech

@ElentirENG ES 12·04·2022 · 11:14 0

What is happening on social networks, and particularly on Twitter, is revealing a drift that comes from afar.

Elon Musk brings to light the daily censorship that left-wing politicians exercised on Twitter
A powerful company related to the left pressures Twitter to continue censoring

The true face of the left was shown in Prague, not Paris

For many years, the left identified censorship as a conservative concept, associated with the Old Regime and fascism (a totalitarian movement that the left identifies with the right, despite being a nationalist socialism). Many believed that the slogans of the leftist revolt in Paris in May 1968 (the famous "Il est interdit d'interdire", it is forbidden to forbid) represented the true nature of the left. On the contrary, his true face was manifested around those dates in Prague, when the USSR sent tanks to crush a revolt that called for democracy.

Una tradición intolerante que tiene su origen en el pensamiento de Karl Marx

However, the true nature of the left had been clearly exposed a century earlier, when Karl Marx formulated his idea of a "dictatorship of the proletariat" that would subjugate all of society to tight control by the state. The communists have always claimed that it would be a provisional phase, but the facts speak for themselves: the first communist dictatorship was established in 1917 and disappeared in 1991 with the fall of communism. Communist China has been under a dictatorship since 1949, with the communist regime showing no intention of dissolving.

The first thing the Bolsheviks did in Russia was to impose press censorship

Significantly, the first thing that the Lenin dictatorship did in Russia was to pass a press censorship law, to prevent the dissemination of news that was not to the liking of the dictatorship. It was the first time that the left shaped its own political regime and it began with censorship, which would soon extend to all areas of life in Russia and in those countries that were subjected to communist oppression . Bolshevik Russia was no exception.

The Spanish left and its censorship during the Second Republic

In Spain, after the arrival of the Second Republic in 1931, one of the first things the left did was pass a "Law for the Defense of the Republic" which established prior censorship, prohibiting all "advocacy of the monarchical regime" and the "dissemination of news that may break credit or disturb peace or public order". Blank spaces and "censorship visa" notices were frequent in the newspapers of those years.

An attempt to subject society to absolute control by the state

Thus, the attempt to limit freedom of expression on social networks by the left is not something new or something that contradicts the ideological tradition of the left. What we are seeing is the embodiment of a typical characteristic of the left: hatred of individual freedom, because that freedom implies distancing itself from absolute control of society by the State, a control that has been the dream of socialists and communists for more than a century. The only novelty is the excuse used to justify this censorship.

In the past they called you an "enemy of the people", now they accuse you of "hate"

In Soviet Russia they censored you on the accusation of being a "counterrevolutionary" and "enemy of the people", expressions that became commonplace and were used to label anyone who opposed the communist elite (including some dissident communists). Now the justification for censorship is to identify anything that disagrees with the left as "hate speech", even though it isn't even remotely so.

The purpose remains the same as in 1917: to prevent opinions different from those that the left considers correct, in the belief that it is always right but, at the same time, in a clear demonstration of their inability to defend with arguments what they consider indisputable, in an intellectual attitude charged with arrogance and at the same time weighed down by ignorance. That is why they consider that it is easier to censor and oust those who discuss their dogmas than to have to explain why they believe their ideas are better than others, leaving not even a small margin for the possibility that they may be wrong.