The EU’s internal market commissioner, Thierry Breton, spoke with Elon Musk to make the case for Brussels, which revealed the EU’s operation against Musk.
Must Watch: Would you live on 3D Printed Mars for a year for $60,000?
How far the EU is ready to go in order to maintain its own bubble of political agenda has become obvious in light of Elon Musk’s purchase of Twitter and the recent responses of Brussels officials.
One increasingly requires a specific dictionary to understand the language of the EU, just as one needs one to comprehend Kant’s writings and his comprehension of particular terminology and concepts. And ‘F – Freedom’ is the first entry to look up. The first word of France’s motto is its equivalent, “liberty.” And now that Elon Musk has acquired Twitter to expressed a desire to bring full speech freedom back to the service, we have a new chance to try and decrypt the encrypted data.
During his speech at the White House on December 1, French President Emmanuel Macron remarked, “Our two nations are sisters in their fight for freedom.” These are words that are extremely consistent with the EU’s newly developing language concerning the freedom of the Chinese people facing the Chinese Communist Party’s zero-Covid policy, the freedom of the Uyghurs in western China, the freedom of Russians resisting the Kremlin, and the freedom of Russians opposing the Kremlin.
Freedom of speech is basically only a concept, as it is controlled by power dynamics just like everything else in the world. This difficult-to-admit fact was demonstrated by the EU’s prompt banning of RT and Sputnik following the start of Russia’s military action in Ukraine. Without a doubt, this weak notion has been employed in geopolitics for aeons to generate amusing, if not pitiful, double standards.
Subscribe to GreatGameIndia
But the actual problem here is not double standards. Pure logic is what’s on the line. The EU’s internal market commissioner, Thierry Breton, spoke with Elon Musk to make the case for Brussels. then declared: “I welcome Elon Musk’s statements of intent to get Twitter 2.0 ready for the DSA [Digital Services Act]. I am pleased to hear that he has read it carefully and considers it as a sensible approach to implement on a worldwide basis. But let’s also be clear that there is still huge work ahead, as Twitter will have to implement transparent user policies, significantly reinforce content moderation, and protect freedom of speech, tackle disinformation with resolve, and limit targeted advertising.”
Breton should provide each person of the EU member states with guidelines or a manual on how to comprehend the EU’s logic in this case. It would be equivalent to saying, “Let’s have lunch together; you’re free to order whatever I tell you to eat,” to “reinforce content moderation and protect freedom of speech.”
By using the term “absolutist,” the mainstream media has found a new way to wage war against those who disagree with all of these unelected bureaucrats’ narratives and restrictions. These unelected bureaucrats had threatened to ban Musk’s newly acquired company from operating in the EU if he didn’t comply with their rules. Although Musk himself identifies as a “free speech absolutist,” pundits use this phrase to denigrate people who they can’t dismiss as “conspiracy theorists.” In this instance, ‘absolutist’ rhymes with ‘terrorist’, ‘extremist’, or whatever you can imagine could be a threat.
Famed Toronto Professor Jordan Peterson has repeatedly argued that free speech implies that one should be challenged and even offended, that it is a condition of dialectics and progress. This makes complete sense. No more in Europe. Some European governments claimed that “limiting freedoms in to protect freedom” was required during the Covid-19 pandemic in order to advance their quarantine policies. Currently, they must restrict free speech in order to safeguard it—a logic that, naturally, can leave many people speechless.
When one considers what is meant to be moderated, things become more apparent. Threats, demands for violence, and dangerous misconceptions about science? Of course, but not exactly. It depends on which political side of the political spectrum you are on. Even if “unacceptable” opinions elude social media filtering in specific situations (the Ukraine conflict, Covid-19, climate change), they typically face severe social pressure and do not gain from media attention.
Then there are topics that cannot even be freely discussed, such as the agenda for LGBTQ+ rights and the EU’s policy on mass immigration. It is not an understatement to say that they have been “promoted by the authorities.” Peter Sutherland, a former Goldman Sachs chairman and UN special representative for international migration, was quoted by the BBC in 2012 as saying that the EU “should undermine national homogeneity.” Since these concerns directly affect people, it is simple to declare a threat to national or international order by invoking emotions and dismissing competing viewpoints as racist, homophobic, or anti-Semitic without bothering with scientific evidence. Anti-peoplekind, to use Justin Trudeau’s phrase, or anti-mankind.
The EU (together with the Democrats in the US) is now dealing with the “absolutist” Elon Musk, who has rehabilitated the previous American president on the network he’s taken on, after having to deal with Donald Trump and his national-centered politics. They made the decision to act rapidly and force their vision on him. Of course not quickly enough, since Musk has a few tricks up his sleeve. Twitter had been favouring the woke side of the political spectrum, as was publicly revealed on December 3 with the publication of “the Twitter Files” by Elon Musk via writer Matt Taibbi. Ten years ago, journalist Glenn Greenwald raised the alarm about this.
So, what does “freedom” mean to the bureaucrats in Brussels? The EU, along with its allied media and supporters, are free to force their extensive agenda of socio-cultural change on opponents who do not want to hear about it – “No matter the cost,” to use Macron’s popular line.