Tag: self-censorship

[Member Post]


There has been a big story this week about the “Texas Church Shooting”.  In news reports, nearly all the time the so-called press refers to the location of said church as “outside Fort Worth”, or “near Fort Worth”, or some such.  Why might it be that the “press”, and even some of us, have been […]

⚠️ This is a members-only post on Ricochet's Member Feed. Want to read it? Join Ricochet's community of conservatives and be part of the conversation.

Join Ricochet for free.

Outsourcing Curation of Access to a Platform Is More Efficient than Crude Censorship


In 1975 Indira Gandhi declared a state of national emergency in India due to “internal disturbances caused by a Foreign Hand.” (She meant the CIA.)

It is widely believed that she actually declared The Emergency (ever since capitalized in India, like The War) because she had just been found guilty by the Supreme Court of using state machinery for electioneering, and she didn’t know what the personal or political consequences of that would be. Anyway, declare it she did and a wide range of civil liberties were suspended. More than 100,000 people were incarcerated as political prisoners over the next two years and there was a very murky forcible sterilization program implemented in parts of North India. In 1977, Indira Gandhi ended The Emergency, released all political prisoners, and called a general election in which her party (the Indian National Congress) was trounced and she lost her own seat.

The Janata Party, the coalition that won the election, managed to maintain their Parliamentary majority till 1980 when internal differences overcame them. They were forced to call an election, Indira Gandhi and the Congress were voted back into power, and the country slipped back into a stupor for the next few years.

We’re Sure as Shootin’ in Trouble But We’re Not Dead Yet: Danish Immigration Minister Has a Muhammed Cartoon on Her iPad


On September 30, 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten published 12 cartoons of Muhammad intended to assert the right to freely criticize Islam. This came in response to Danish news reports of a children’s book author unable to find an illustrator willing to provide art for his new book on the life of Muhammad. The paper’s editorial board decided to ask members of the newspaper illustrators union if they would be willing to draw Muhammed. Of 42 union members, 12 responded with drawings. The J-P decided to run the story as an opinion piece, a full page titled, “The Face of Muhammed,” consisting of the 12 images and this accompanying text signed by the culture editor of the paper:

“Modern, secular society is rejected by some Muslims. They demand a special position, insisting on special consideration of their own religious feelings. It is incompatible with contemporary democracy and freedom of speech, where one must be ready to put up with insults, mockery and ridicule. It is certainly not always attractive and nice to look at, and it does not mean that religious feelings should be made fun of at any price, but that is of minor importance in the present context. … we are on our way to a slippery slope where no-one can tell how the self-censorship will end. That is why Morgenavisen Jyllands-Posten has invited members of the Danish editorial cartoonists union to draw Muhammad as they see him.” — Flemming Rose