Buddy I didn’t deny anything about how our own government is actively an authoritarian regime or any of the shitty things it is doing. But we still are not at People’s Republic of China (PRC) levels yet. We do not actively censor the media on the same level as PRC where even the slightest hint of disapproval is enough to be disappeared, yes though the waters are being tested here. For now we still have elections on the state level that can mean something since more than one party can run. We are still allowed to protest here without just being shot on sight. We have an uncensored internet for the time being so I do think it is fair to say we are not as bad as the PRC.
The sacred rituals of Western civilization-- the election and the press-- were long ago subsumed by capital. You don’t need to formally censor when the oligarchs own the media and will skew the messaging to serve their interest. You don’t need to have a single party state when the Overton window has been dragged so far right that no electoral outcome can actually oust billionaire rule.
At least, in that context, we can ask who censorship serves? Is it about social cohesion and stability, or preserving the privilege of a handful of people?
Buddy I didn’t deny anything about how our own government is actively an authoritarian regime or any of the shitty things it is doing. But we still are not at People’s Republic of China (PRC) levels yet. We do not actively censor the media on the same level as PRC where even the slightest hint of disapproval is enough to be disappeared, yes though the waters are being tested here. For now we still have elections on the state level that can mean something since more than one party can run. We are still allowed to protest here without just being shot on sight. We have an uncensored internet for the time being so I do think it is fair to say we are not as bad as the PRC.
The sacred rituals of Western civilization-- the election and the press-- were long ago subsumed by capital. You don’t need to formally censor when the oligarchs own the media and will skew the messaging to serve their interest. You don’t need to have a single party state when the Overton window has been dragged so far right that no electoral outcome can actually oust billionaire rule.
At least, in that context, we can ask who censorship serves? Is it about social cohesion and stability, or preserving the privilege of a handful of people?