This is nothing new for the social media giants of Facebook and Twitter who already engage in censorship but now have the blessings of a government to shut down political speech.
Beatrix von Storch, a leading political figure in the Alternative for Germany(AfD) party, is perhaps the first to be hit by the new “hate speech” law when she commented on the Cologne police for tweeting a New Year’s message in Arabic when only two years earlier the holiday saw mass rapes of women by Muslim immigrants.
Von Storch’s tweet, “What the hell is happening in this country? Why is an official police site tweeting in Arabic? Do you think it is to appease the barbaric, gang-raping hordes of Muslim men?”, was deleted in spite of being true, and her account was shut down for 12 hours.
Legislating “hate” speech on the surface may seem like a noble cause until it is understood that the legislators themselves get to determine the definition of “hate”, which usually means anything that opposes the legislators’ views. In essence freedom of speech itself can be defined as “hate” by those in control since it is speech which they seek to regulate.
Facebook, another known supporter of political speech censorship, also blocked von Storch. “Facebook has also censored me. That is the end of the constitutional state”, she also tweeted. But sanctioned by the German government or not, both Facebook and Twitter have long-standing record of censorship that is only reinforced by the government language-control law.
While allowing racy pictures and leftist propaganda regardless of language and content, the two behemoth sites, on a continuous basis, block and or ban posts that point out assaults on freedom and liberty, citing “hate” as the chief reason.
While countless examples of political speech blocking occur in social media daily in the United States, one in particular made it clear just how far internet corporations would go to shut down opposing opinions.
On September 1, 2017, Facebook, Twitter, and Youtube conspired to shut down political debate from even those in the black community who disagree with the terrorist group, Black Lives Matter. When Candace Owens posted a You Tube video commentary of an August 16th article from one of the terrorist group organizers, Chanelle Helm, it was blocked or banned by Facebook, You Tube, and Twitter.
The video commentary that was blocked was in no way derogatory unlike the article that Owens, a black woman herself, was criticizing. While the Black Lives Matter organization claims to support civil rights for blacks, You Tube, Facebook, and Twitter essentially told all blacks to “know their place” in the realm of political discourse.
Sadly, many users of these sites don’t realize or simply refuse to use other sites who allow true freedom of speech. It is unclear how many of them actually understand that these newer, less used, sites need to grow in order to compete and take power away from the two social media giants.
The owner of InternetDeputy.com, for example has created a complete social networking site within its news reporting domain. “Originally there were several people who were excited about abandoning Facebook in order to make the ‘Deputy Community’ grow, but no one was willing to spread the word or even try to use it when it came down to brass tacks.”
He continued, “It is a conservative-libertarian idea to be self sustaining without asking for money and we were hoping to get enough revenue via advertising from the site itself so that we could create an app for the site, but no one was willing to even give the alternative a try to get the ball rolling and now until the domain can afford to build an app, I am just stuck and all those people who get blocked on a regular basis won’t even give it a try.”
Frustrated, he also said, “We even have the browser version to the point that it is almost like using an app, yet, even those who said they were excited have completely abandoned the idea. I guess that they are just addicted to the very entities that block them. It’s kind of sad that these users don’t remember that both Facebook and Twitter started out with just a few people.”
The new German law is likely to embolden the already elite style social media companies who wish to tell people what to think. As mentioned earlier, they already block common individuals, but Beatrix von Storch is a high-profile law maker who likely would not have been blocked were it not for the new German law.
Without any statement to show opposition to censorship, both Facebook and Twitter have reaffirmed their position on silencing those who wish to engage in free political speech. As such, it is now completely evident that these two entities, along with other internet giants such as Google, are against the ideas of free speech from the very country within which they were founded—The United States of America.
Until now, it was suspected that these companies, who control so much of the internet, are anti-American, but the lack of outrage for being forced to censor free speech, serves only reinforce this notion.