Peloni: The policies of censorship are policies of control and oppression. All freedom loving people should be repulsed by the attempts of governing oppressions which limit their freedom of expression and personal liberty.
by Drieu Godefridi • Gatestone Institute • January 9, 2026
EU Censorship. Image via AI
- According to critics, this framework [the European Union’s Digital Services Act (DSA)] effectively forces American platforms to act as “speech police” on behalf of the EU, under the constant threat of severe sanctions. In doing so, the DSA produces extraterritorial effects that extend well beyond Europe. This point is crucial: any American user of X, for instance, can be sanctioned by X for expressing opinions on the platform. In practice, the DSA is thus applied to all Americans. This requirement constitutes a clear instance of the normative imperialism that has characterized the EU for the past 20 years.
- The only conceivable technical alternative would be the creation of separate platforms — an X-USA and an X-EU — which would amount to a denial of the very idea of a global network and of the internet itself.
- The US House Judiciary Committee has denounced this system as one of “organized censorship,” in which the EU effectively “arms” NGOs to compel American technology companies to remove content that is lawful in the United States but deemed “problematic” in Europe.
- Fines could reach up to 6% of a company’s global turnover, amounting to potentially billions of euros for firms such as Meta or Google. In cases of non-cooperation, platforms even face the possibility of a temporary ban within the EU.
- This environment of stringent enforcement strongly encourages platforms to over-moderate content in order to minimize regulatory risk, leading to the removal of content that is perfectly legal. We are speaking here of approximately eight million posts deleted per month in the European Union, not including complete bans, such as those imposed on Russian media outlets.
- Illegal content is treated as the top priority. Defined by the EU and national legislation, it includes hate speech (such as incitement to violence based on race or religion), terrorist content, child sexual exploitation material, counterfeit goods, and dangerous products…. Yet the central problem remains: “hate” itself is never defined in law.
- It must be stressed that disinformation itself is not illegal. The DSA therefore mandates the active censorship of content that is lawful — but merely displeasing to the European Princes and their legions of censors.
- American freedom of speech cannot survive a “Big Brother” DSA.
The Digital Services Act (DSA), adopted by the European Union in 2022 and fully applicable since February 2024 to “very large online platforms” (VLOPs) such as X, Facebook, TikTok, and Google, is not officially presented as an instrument of “organized censorship.” Formally, it is purported to be a regulatory framework intended to govern digital services in order to protect users from illegal content, systemic risks, and opaque platform practices.
However, a growing number of critics — particularly in the United States, including Elon Musk and several Republican members of Congress — describe the DSA as a mechanism of mass censorship. In their view, it imposes heavy bureaucratic oversight on freedom of expression and enables selective repression of dissenting opinions.
There was a time – near enough in living memory when US Customs and/ or Post Office would in checking books from Europe confiscate art books containing photoplates of paintings depicting (semi-) nudes classical scenes under “Obscenity” legislation. The fact that any number of Catholic churches and schools displayed the nudity and S & M of charged crucifixes was just accepted a s”social wallpaper”.
This outcry over the EU’s DSA is another US insistence – understandable – on its commercial superiority at home and inflicted elsewhere by the notorious US refusal to respect and honour other states’ copyright and patents.
As things are even in the US: print, vinyl and tape publishers are responsible for what they publish as much as authors for what they write. It is time to bring the internet and all its works into line so that blasphemy and obscenity are decided before a judge and jury and democratic legislation. The current situation is the opposite of the equally ridiculous “Hays Code” cinema censorship.
This sounds like a method to milk US platforms, including “tests” of compliance which are not as innocent as they sound. Either rhe USA finds means to reverse the money flow or the connections need to be cut.
Actually, any news broadcast in Europe could bring in $millions in hate speech claims. Almost any news session of any kind contains “expert information” on how Trump, in his infantile idiocy, is causing trouble around the globe. It seems that any hate speech is OK if it is Trump who is being hated. This kind of misinformation could really bring in lots of money, depending on the court, of course. A WEF sponsored court would dismiss all such claims but push European claims to the max.
The US has already allegedly had Microsoft cut all its services to the ICJ (International Court of Justice).
Equally remember the creation of the League of Nations and the UN were US initatives to help subvert and dismantle rival powers by promoting self determination ie accelerating existing disruptions so that the World became a mess of small powers as in pre-unified Germany and Italy. Trouble is that it backfired and herding cats is trickier than leading a couple of mules on a path.
The touchiness about Trump’s touchiness is a textbook case of short memory. US politicians and others spent centuries making nasty comments about other powers, Hollywood claims stealing otheer countries’ victories etc, and being paranoid about “Communism”. Any hostile variant of Marxism (and the Manifestoo advocates income tax and schools for children instead of child factory labour) is the politcal equivalent of cholera which is easy to prevent by a clean water supply and working sewerage. Provide jobs, public health, and schools to opportunities to climb the social ladders, and Marxists become just another in-bunch of OTT (Over The Top) ideologues like Jesuits, Amish and Antisemites.
@frankadam I guess they’ll have to go back to Wang.
https://computeradsfromthepast.substack.com/p/wang-word-processor?utm_medium=email