Censorship: Hypocrisy of Fascist Keyboard Warriors

Google’s Deep Dive Podcast: The Silent Battle: How Censorship Fuels Authoritarian Control in Professional Spaces

Censorship as a Tool of Authoritarian Control

The Not-So-Silenced Majority

“Just Say No”
– Nancy Reagan

Imagine this scenario: You share a thoughtful, well-reasoned opinion on LinkedIn—a platform traditionally reserved for professional networking and business discourse. Your comment challenges an authoritarian stance or exposes an uncomfortable truth. Almost immediately, the backlash begins. Responses like, “Take it to Facebook,” flood in, thinly veiled attempts to dismiss and silence your perspective. They argue, implicitly or explicitly, that politics and business don’t mix, that this platform is no place for such discussions.

But here’s the reality: in this new normal—a world shaped by authoritarian agendas that a vocal minority attempt to foist on the majority—the lines between politics and business have blurred beyond recognition. These issues are no longer confined to the political sphere. They now permeate every aspect of life, including the professional realm. Human rights, freedom of expression, inclusivity, and ethical governance are all intertwined with the way we work, live, and collaborate.

By telling you to “Take it to Facebook,” these dissent-crushers reveal their true intentions: they are not just uncomfortable with your opinion; they are terrified of it. They fear the power of free speech and the ability of one voice to inspire many. Their demand is not about appropriateness—it’s about control. It’s an attempt to make you feel out of place for daring to speak your truth in a space they want to dominate with conformity.

This tactic, however, must not succeed. As uncomfortable as it may be for some, this is precisely the moment to push back and assert the truth. Business and politics are now undeniably intertwined. The professional realm is not exempt from the consequences of tyranny, censorship, and authoritarian overreach. In fact, it is on platforms like LinkedIn, where the leaders of industries and influencers of public opinion gather, that the loudest and clearest responses against such tyranny must emerge.

In a world where silence equals complicity, the duty of every individual—whether in politics, business, or any other sphere—is to speak truth to power. Because when authoritarianism creeps into our daily lives, it doesn’t just silence the political—it suppresses innovation, creativity, and the very freedoms that allow businesses, communities, and societies to thrive.

This example is emblematic of a broader trend: the weaponization of censorship by authoritarian regimes and their supporters to normalize and enforce their agendas. It is not simply a battle for free speech—it is a battle for the very soul of society.

Here’s a deeper exploration of how authoritarian regimes and their supporters use censorship to normalize and enforce their agendas onto the majority.

1. Silencing Dissenting Voices

“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.”
– Edmund Burke

Authoritarian regimes target dissent with laser focus, ensuring opposing views don’t gain traction.

Suppressing Opposition Media: Independent media outlets are often the first casualty. By banning, intimidating, or outright destroying these platforms, authoritarian leaders ensure that only state-sanctioned narratives are available. Journalists critical of the regime face imprisonment, exile, or worse.
Criminalizing Protest and Free Speech: Authoritarian regimes enact draconian laws to criminalize criticism, labeling dissent as subversion, sedition, or even terrorism. This forces individuals into silence under threat of severe punishment.

Example: In Turkey, journalists and activists face arrest under anti-terror laws simply for criticizing the government on social media.

2. Controlling the Narrative

“Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”
– George Orwell, 1984

Censorship isn’t just about suppressing information—it’s also about replacing it with propaganda that supports the regime’s goals.

Propaganda Overload: State-run media dominate, presenting the government as the only source of truth while demonizing dissenters as dangerous and untrustworthy.
Historical Revisionism: Regimes rewrite history to align with their narrative, erasing inconvenient truths about past failures or atrocities.

Example: In Russia, laws restrict how World War II is discussed, with harsh penalties for challenging the state’s glorified version of events.

3. Creating Fear and Uncertainty

“The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
– Dr. Martin Luther King

Censorship creates an environment where people are afraid to speak or even think critically.

Surveillance and Reporting Mechanisms: Governments deploy mass surveillance to monitor citizens’ communication. Fear of being watched forces people to self-censor, avoiding topics that might bring suspicion.
Ambiguity in Enforcement: Vague laws allow regimes to selectively target individuals, ensuring that everyone feels at risk.

Example: In China, the “Great Firewall” controls internet access while pervasive surveillance ensures that dissent is swiftly punished.

4. Weaponizing Technology

“In the hands of fascists, the digital world becomes an extension of their tyranny—surveillance, manipulation, and control at unprecedented scales.”
– Shoshana Zuboff

Technology has become a double-edged sword in the hands of authoritarian regimes.

Internet Censorship: Platforms are blocked or manipulated to restrict access to opposing viewpoints. Social media algorithms may even be co-opted to amplify propaganda.
Misinformation and Disinformation: Fake news is used to muddy the waters, making it difficult for the public to discern fact from fiction.

Example: In Myanmar, the military used Facebook to spread hate speech and misinformation during its campaign against the Rohingya, leading to mass violence.

5. Targeting Vulnerable Groups

“Censorship is the child of fear and the father of ignorance.”
– Laurie Halse Anderson

Authoritarian regimes often scapegoat minorities or marginalized communities to consolidate their power.

Marginalizing Minorities: By silencing vulnerable groups, regimes ensure these communities remain powerless and unable to challenge systemic oppression.
Divide and Conquer: Polarization is used to create divisions within society, making unified resistance more difficult.

Example: In India, censorship disproportionately targets Muslim activists and journalists who speak out against Hindu nationalist policies.

6. Institutionalizing Censorship

“When the state controls what is said, it controls the way people think.”
– Noam Chomsky

Censorship becomes normalized when it is institutionalized, woven into the fabric of everyday life.

State-Controlled Institutions: Schools, universities, and cultural organizations are commandeered to promote government propaganda and stifle critical thinking.
Normalization Through Repetition: When the regime’s narrative is repeated often enough, it begins to feel like the only reality.

Example: In North Korea, education is entirely state-controlled, indoctrinating citizens from childhood to revere the ruling family and distrust the outside world.

7. International Tactics

“Dictatorships have learned that to control a population, you must control their information. And in a connected world, controlling information means controlling the internet.”
– Reporters Without Borders

Authoritarian regimes don’t stop at their borders—they export censorship tactics globally.

Censorship Beyond Borders: By pressuring foreign companies or governments, authoritarian regimes extend their reach. For instance, exiled dissidents are often targeted abroad.
Global Disinformation Campaigns: Propaganda is disseminated internationally to shape global perceptions and obscure the regime’s actions.

Example: Saudi Arabia uses bots and troll farms to target dissidents on platforms like Twitter, even outside its borders.

The Effects on Society

“Censorship is telling a man he can’t have a steak just because a baby can’t chew it.”
– Mark Twain

Censorship impacts society in profound ways, leaving scars that can take generations to heal:

Normalization of Authoritarian Agendas: With alternative viewpoints erased, the regime’s ideology becomes the default.
Reduction in Critical Thinking: A population deprived of diverse perspectives loses the ability to question and challenge authority.
Entrenchment of Power: By controlling information, authoritarian regimes ensure their grip on power remains unchallenged, eroding democratic norms.

Why Speaking Truth to Power Matters

“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.”
– Frederick Douglass

In the face of these tactics, the antidote is courage and persistence. Every time someone speaks out against censorship, challenges the narrative, or defends the right to free speech, they weaken the authoritarian grip.

READ: Jesse Lynn Madera Soars with New Album Speed Of Sound

Platforms like LinkedIn, once seen as neutral spaces, have become battlegrounds for truth. When fascist sympathizers dismiss dissenting voices with statements like “Take it to Facebook,” they are actively trying to marginalize those voices. The response must be louder, bolder, and unwavering: free speech belongs everywhere, especially where authoritarianism seeks to silence it.

In a world where authoritarian regimes and their supporters thrive on silence, the truth must be spoken, shared, and amplified. Now more than ever, it is the duty of every individual to resist censorship and stand firm in defense of freedom.

The Voice Beneath the Red Tape

“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.”
– Milan Kundera

In the quiet confines of a small coworking space in Denver, Zahra Qilwa stared at her computer screen, her hands trembling over the keyboard. A Black transwoman of Ethiopian descent, Zahra was no stranger to conflict. She had spent years advocating for marginalized voices through her nonprofit, Voices of Resonance, which partnered with TATANKA to amplify the stories of disenfranchised communities. But today, she wasn’t fighting for someone else. She was fighting for herself.

The email on her screen was blunt and clinical. Her recent post on LinkedIn, detailing how systemic censorship suppressed the voices of minority groups in corporate spaces, had been flagged and removed for violating “community guidelines.” The irony burned deep. Her words were a plea for inclusion, yet the system labeled them as divisive.

Zahra’s journey with TATANKA began three years earlier. A friend had told her about the initiative—a collaborative project blending culture, technology, and storytelling to create an inclusive space for people like her. Through TATANKA, Zahra had found not just a platform but a community of individuals who embraced her identities and her voice. She had recorded a podcast with them, sharing her struggles as a transwoman navigating corporate America. That podcast had gone viral, resonating with thousands.

But as her audience grew, so did the backlash. Zahra’s presence on LinkedIn, a space traditionally devoid of overt politics, became a battleground. Anonymous comments filled her inbox, calling her unprofessional, accusing her of injecting “identity politics” into the workplace. One particularly venomous message read, “Take this nonsense to Facebook.”

The pushback wasn’t confined to social media. Zahra’s nonprofit began losing donors. Invitations to speak at conferences dwindled. Her name became synonymous with “controversy.” But she refused to be silent. “The moment I stop speaking,” she told herself, “is the moment they win.”

It was TATANKA that gave Zahra her next lifeline. Their team invited her to lead a live-streamed series titled “Unmuted,” where marginalized voices could share their stories. The first episode featured a Native American artist reclaiming their heritage through digital art. Another brought on an Afghan refugee advocating for gender equity in tech. Zahra’s episode, “The Professional Suppression of Identity,” broke records, drawing attention to the subtle, insidious ways corporate culture policed voices like hers.

However, as Zahra gained ground, the resistance intensified. LinkedIn continued to flag her posts. She filed appeals, each met with a vague response. The censorship wasn’t explicit; it was cloaked in the language of “guidelines” and “neutrality.” It was a calculated silence, a quiet erasure.

One night, Zahra found herself at the TATANKA recording studio, venting her frustration to a producer named Hana. “They’re trying to bury us,” Zahra said, her voice cracking. “Every post, every podcast—if it doesn’t fit their sanitized narrative, it’s gone.”

Hana, a Palestinian woman who had faced her own battles with censorship, looked at Zahra with steady eyes. “They can delete your posts,” Hana said, “but they can’t erase the impact. Every word you speak, every story you amplify—it’s already out there. You’re not just fighting for yourself. You’re building a legacy.”

That night, Zahra stayed in the studio until dawn, recording a new episode. It wasn’t just about her story this time. It was about the countless voices that had been silenced, the truths buried beneath corporate facades. She titled it: “Red Tape and Resistance.”

When the episode aired, it was met with a tidal wave of support. Emails poured in from professionals across industries, sharing their own experiences of censorship. TATANKA’s platform crashed under the weight of the traffic, a bittersweet victory. Zahra knew the battle was far from over, but for the first time, she felt the tide turning.

Takeaway

Zahra’s story illustrates the insidious nature of censorship in professional spaces, especially for marginalized individuals. It reminds us that silence isn’t always enforced through loud bans; it’s often achieved through subtler mechanisms—guidelines, policies, and unspoken rules.

The story challenges readers to reflect on their own platforms and privileges. It calls on us to amplify silenced voices, question sanitized narratives, and understand that speaking truth to power isn’t just an act of courage—it’s a responsibility. As Zahra learned through TATANKA, our collective voice is the most potent weapon against authoritarian suppression.

Summary

The text is an article from TATANKA, a cultural initiative, discussing censorship’s use as a tool of authoritarian control. It details how censorship silences dissent, controls narratives, creates fear, and targets vulnerable groups, using examples from various countries. The article features a case study of Zahra Qilwa, a Black transwoman whose advocacy for marginalized voices on LinkedIn was suppressed. Ultimately, the piece advocates for resisting censorship and amplifying silenced voices to combat authoritarianism.

Briefing Document: Censorship and Authoritarian Tactics

Subject: Analysis of “Censorship: Hypocrisy of Fascist Keyboard Warriors” by TATANKA

1. Introduction

This document analyzes the article “Censorship: Hypocrisy of Fascist Keyboard Warriors” published by TATANKA, a collaborative project blending culture, technology, and storytelling. The article argues that censorship, particularly in professional spaces, is being weaponized by authoritarian forces to silence dissenting voices, normalize their agendas, and suppress innovation. It highlights how seemingly neutral platforms like LinkedIn are becoming battlegrounds for truth and how marginalized communities are disproportionately affected.

2. Main Themes and Key Ideas:

Censorship as an Authoritarian Tool: The core argument is that censorship is not just about suppressing information but is a deliberate strategy employed by authoritarian regimes and their supporters to maintain control. The article states: “This example is emblematic of a broader trend: the weaponization of censorship by authoritarian regimes and their supporters to normalize and enforce their agendas. It is not simply a battle for free speech—it is a battle for the very soul of society.”
Blurring Lines Between Politics and Business: The article challenges the notion that politics and business are separate realms, stating, “in this new normal—a world shaped by authoritarian agendas that a vocal minority attempt to foist on the majority—the lines between politics and business have blurred beyond recognition.” It argues that issues like human rights, freedom of expression, and ethical governance are all intertwined with work and collaboration.
“Take it to Facebook” Tactic: The article dissects the dismissive “Take it to Facebook” response as a deliberate attempt to silence dissent on professional platforms like LinkedIn. It notes, “By telling you to ‘Take it to Facebook,’ these dissent-crushers reveal their true intentions: they are not just uncomfortable with your opinion; they are terrified of it.” This tactic is seen as a fear of free speech and an attempt to enforce conformity.
Normalization of Censorship: The piece details how censorship is normalized and institutionalized through various methods, stating, “Censorship becomes normalized when it is institutionalized, woven into the fabric of everyday life.” Examples include state-controlled institutions, historical revisionism, and repetition of propaganda.
Weaponization of Technology: The article points out how technology, particularly the internet, has become a tool for authoritarian control, noting, “In the hands of fascists, the digital world becomes an extension of their tyranny—surveillance, manipulation, and control at unprecedented scales.” This includes internet censorship, misinformation, and the use of social media algorithms to amplify propaganda.
Targeting Vulnerable Groups: Authoritarian regimes often scapegoat minorities to consolidate power by “silencing vulnerable groups, regimes ensure these communities remain powerless and unable to challenge systemic oppression.” This is exacerbated by creating divisions within society, making unified resistance more difficult.

READ: New Song by Volume Five “We Just Disagree”

3. Seven Key Tactics of Authoritarian Censorship:

The article breaks down seven specific tactics used by authoritarian regimes to control information and silence dissent:

Silencing Dissenting Voices: Suppressing opposition media, criminalizing protest and free speech.

Quote: “Authoritarian regimes target dissent with laser focus, ensuring opposing views don’t gain traction.”

Controlling the Narrative: Propagandizing, rewriting history, and using state-run media to promote the regime’s view.

Quote: “Censorship isn’t just about suppressing information—it’s also about replacing it with propaganda that supports the regime’s goals.”

Creating Fear and Uncertainty: Using surveillance, reporting mechanisms, and ambiguous laws to force self-censorship.

Quote: “Censorship creates an environment where people are afraid to speak or even think critically.”

Weaponizing Technology: Using internet censorship, misinformation, and manipulating platforms to control information.

Quote: “Technology has become a double-edged sword in the hands of authoritarian regimes.”

Targeting Vulnerable Groups: Marginalizing minorities to consolidate power.

Quote: “By silencing vulnerable groups, regimes ensure these communities remain powerless and unable to challenge systemic oppression.”

Institutionalizing Censorship: Normalizing censorship through state-controlled institutions and repeated narratives.

Quote: “When the state controls what is said, it controls the way people think.”

International Tactics: Exporting censorship and disinformation tactics across borders. * Quote: “Dictatorships have learned that to control a population, you must control their information. And in a connected world, controlling information means controlling the internet.”

4. The Case of Zahra Qilwa:

The article includes a case study about Zahra Qilwa, a Black transwoman of Ethiopian descent who advocates for marginalized voices. Her story demonstrates how censorship operates in professional spaces.
Her posts on LinkedIn advocating for inclusion were flagged and removed, and her non-profit lost funding.
This example showcases how even subtle actions, like invoking “community guidelines,” are used to silence dissent.
Her story culminates in the creation of a live stream series, “Unmuted,” where marginalized voices are given a platform, illustrating the importance of creating spaces for free expression. This is a direct challenge to the ‘take it to facebook’ mentality of the ‘fascist keyboard warriors’.
The case of Zahra Qilwa is a reminder that “silence isn’t always enforced through loud bans; it’s often achieved through subtler mechanisms—guidelines, policies, and unspoken rules.”

5. Effects on Society:

The article describes how censorship results in the “normalization of authoritarian agendas,” a “reduction in critical thinking,” and the “entrenchment of power” by those in control.
It emphasizes that the impacts of censorship can be long-lasting and detrimental to the fabric of society, eroding democratic norms and hindering social and economic progress.
“Censorship impacts society in profound ways, leaving scars that can take generations to heal.”

6. Call to Action:

The article concludes with a call to resist censorship and defend free speech. It argues that “speaking truth to power isn’t just an act of courage—it’s a responsibility.”
It positions platforms like LinkedIn, and by extension all public spaces, as important battlegrounds for truth where “free speech belongs everywhere, especially where authoritarianism seeks to silence it.”
It advocates that the only way to counter the spread of authoritarianism is to speak out, share stories, and create platforms that amplify marginalized voices.
It emphasizes that “every time someone speaks out against censorship, challenges the narrative, or defends the right to free speech, they weaken the authoritarian grip.”

7. Quotes that summarize the article’s message:

“In a world where silence equals complicity, the duty of every individual—whether in politics, business, or any other sphere—is to speak truth to power.”
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” – Frederick Douglass
“The struggle of man against power is the struggle of memory against forgetting.” – Milan Kundera
“our collective voice is the most potent weapon against authoritarian suppression.”

8. Connections to TATANKA’s Mission:

The article strongly aligns with TATANKA’s stated mission to be an inclusive space for marginalized voices, blending culture, technology, and storytelling. The project’s use of digital tools and platforms to empower those who have been silenced is a key theme throughout the article. TATANKA sees themselves as a counter to the authoritarian forces described in the document.

9. Conclusion:

The article “Censorship: Hypocrisy of Fascist Keyboard Warriors” is a powerful critique of the ways in which authoritarian regimes use censorship to control narratives and maintain power. It emphasizes the importance of speaking truth to power, especially in professional spaces, and advocates for amplifying the voices of marginalized communities. It frames free speech not as a privilege but as an essential tool in resisting authoritarianism and building a more just and inclusive society. The case study of Zahra and her work with TATANKA demonstrates the importance of action and how the tools of digital media can be wielded against those who seek to oppress them. The article frames silence as complicity and challenges readers to use their own voices and platforms to advocate for freedom.

This detailed briefing document should provide a comprehensive understanding of the main points and arguments in the given article, as well as the context for its publication by TATANKA.

FAQ: Censorship and Authoritarian Tactics in the Digital Age

What is the main argument made in the “Censorship: Hypocrisy of Fascist Keyboard Warriors” article?
The central argument is that authoritarian regimes and their supporters are increasingly using censorship as a tool to silence dissenting voices and normalize their agendas. They do this by suppressing opposition media, criminalizing free speech, controlling narratives through propaganda, creating fear through surveillance, weaponizing technology (including the internet), targeting vulnerable groups, and institutionalizing censorship. The article argues that these tactics, which are not confined to overt bans but also encompass subtle mechanisms like community guidelines and unspoken rules, are a threat to free expression and ultimately undermine the foundations of healthy, diverse societies.
How does the article define “dissent” in the context of professional spaces like LinkedIn?
The article defines “dissent” as any expression of a thoughtful, reasoned opinion that challenges an authoritarian stance or exposes an uncomfortable truth, particularly in professional online spaces. It emphasizes that in today’s world, issues like human rights, inclusivity, and ethical governance are intertwined with professional life. Therefore, expressing views on these topics, which may be perceived as political by some, is considered legitimate and necessary dissent. The article rejects attempts to marginalize such voices by claiming that these platforms are not appropriate for these discussions.
What is the significance of the “Take it to Facebook” response described in the article?
The “Take it to Facebook” response, used when dissenting views are expressed on platforms like LinkedIn, is presented as a thinly veiled attempt to dismiss and silence critical perspectives. It reveals the fear of those who promote authoritarian agendas of the power of free speech. The intent is not to maintain neutrality or professional boundaries but to exert control over the discussion and to make those who speak out feel out of place for challenging the dominant narrative. The article contends this tactic is an attempt to segregate and therefore neutralize dissenting opinions, rather than allowing an open and honest discourse.
How do authoritarian regimes use propaganda and historical revisionism as tools of censorship?
Authoritarian regimes use propaganda to control the narrative by presenting the government as the sole source of truth, while demonizing dissenters. This is done through state-run media which promotes the government’s perspective. Historical revisionism, meanwhile, involves rewriting history to fit the regime’s narrative, erasing inconvenient truths about past failures or atrocities. Together, propaganda and revisionism serve to create a distorted reality that reinforces the regime’s authority and suppresses any opposition by shaping public perception.
What role does technology play in modern censorship according to the article?
Technology is portrayed as a double-edged sword in the context of censorship. While it can facilitate free expression and information sharing, authoritarian regimes have weaponized it to their advantage. They utilize internet censorship by blocking platforms and manipulating algorithms to restrict access to dissenting views. They also deploy misinformation and disinformation to muddy the waters, making it hard for the public to distinguish truth from falsehood. The article emphasizes that this control over technology enables unprecedented surveillance and manipulation, extending the reach of censorship.
How does the story of Zahra Qilwa illustrate the points made in the article?
Zahra Qilwa’s story provides a personal narrative that illustrates the broader arguments of the article. As a Black transwoman of Ethiopian descent, she experiences censorship firsthand when her posts detailing systemic suppression of minority voices on LinkedIn are removed. She becomes the target of backlash and loses donors for her nonprofit. This exemplifies how marginalized individuals are often disproportionately affected by censorship. Her story demonstrates how censorship is not just about overt bans, but also about subtle mechanisms designed to silence voices deemed “divisive.” Zahra’s experience with TATANKA then shows how collaborative and supportive platforms can provide a way for such voices to overcome barriers and to push back against authoritarian suppression, further driving home the importance of amplifying marginalized voices as a tool for resistance.
What is TATANKA and what role does it play in combating censorship and promoting inclusivity?
TATANKA is presented as a collaborative project blending culture, technology, and storytelling to create an inclusive space for marginalized communities. It offers a platform for individuals like Zahra to share their stories, counter censorship, and build a community. By facilitating podcasts, livestreams, and artistic expression, TATANKA amplifies the voices of those who are often silenced, and helps create spaces that actively fight against authoritarian control, thereby positioning itself as a crucial counterforce to censorship. The organization appears to actively support marginalized groups and help them find their voice.
What responsibility does the article suggest that individuals have in the face of censorship?
The article argues that in the face of censorship, it is the duty of every individual to speak truth to power. Silence is portrayed as complicity, allowing authoritarianism to thrive. It is a responsibility to actively challenge censored narratives, defend the right to free speech, and amplify voices that are being silenced, particularly within the professional and public spheres. The article calls for courage and persistence in resisting attempts to marginalize or suppress dissent and encourages individuals to use their voices and platforms to challenge injustice and defend freedom.

READ: 22nd Century Compos Mentis Man - Song: 001-Troposphere

Censorship and Authoritarianism: A Study Guide

Quiz

According to the article, what is the primary tactic used by “dissent-crushers” on professional platforms like LinkedIn when faced with dissenting opinions?
How does the article define the relationship between politics and business in the “new normal”?
What are two ways authoritarian regimes attempt to control the narrative, according to the article?
According to the article, how is technology being used as a tool of censorship?
Why do authoritarian regimes target vulnerable groups, according to the article?
How does the article describe the way that censorship is sometimes institutionalized?
What does the article identify as the most powerful antidote to the tactics of censorship?
How was Zahra Qilwa’s LinkedIn post that detailed the suppression of marginalized voices received?
How does Hana, a TATANKA producer, encourage Zahra after her posts are repeatedly flagged?
What broader societal impact does the article suggest is created by censorship and the silencing of dissenting voices?

Answer Key

The article states that “dissent-crushers” attempt to dismiss and silence dissenting opinions by telling people to “Take it to Facebook,” implying that certain topics are not suitable for professional discourse.
The article argues that the lines between politics and business have blurred, meaning that issues like human rights, freedom of expression, and ethical governance now permeate all aspects of life, including the professional realm.
The article indicates that authoritarian regimes use propaganda to present themselves as the only source of truth and rewrite history to align with their narrative.
The article explains that technology is used to censor via internet blocks and by manipulating algorithms to amplify propaganda and spread misinformation.
According to the article, authoritarian regimes scapegoat minorities to consolidate their power and ensure those communities remain unable to challenge systematic oppression.
The article states that censorship becomes normalized when it is woven into the fabric of everyday life, with state-controlled institutions promoting propaganda and stifling critical thinking.
The article identifies courage and persistence, especially speaking out against censorship, as the most powerful antidote to authoritarian tactics.
Her post was flagged and removed for violating “community guidelines,” and she received negative comments accusing her of injecting “identity politics” into the workplace.
Hana tells Zahra that although her posts can be deleted, the impact of her words and stories cannot be erased, and that she is building a legacy.
The article suggests that censorship leads to the normalization of authoritarian agendas, a reduction in critical thinking, and an entrenchment of power by the regimes that employ it.

Essay Questions

Analyze the relationship between censorship and authoritarian control, drawing on examples from the article. How does censorship function as a tool to maintain power and suppress dissent?
Discuss the role of social media platforms, like LinkedIn, in either enabling or resisting censorship. What responsibilities, if any, do these platforms have in ensuring free speech?
Using the example of Zahra Qilwa’s story, explore the specific challenges and barriers faced by marginalized individuals when speaking out against systemic issues.
The article argues that in a world where silence equals complicity, the duty of every individual is to speak truth to power. In your own experience, how might that argument apply to the professional sphere?
Consider the role of technology in both enabling and countering censorship. What are the ethical considerations that arise from the weaponization of technology by authoritarian regimes?

Glossary of Key Terms

Authoritarianism: A form of government characterized by strong central power and limited political freedoms.
Censorship: The suppression or prohibition of speech, public communication, or other information deemed objectionable, harmful, sensitive, or inconvenient.
Dissent: The expression or holding of opinions at variance with those previously, commonly, or officially held.
Propaganda: Information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.
Historical Revisionism: The reinterpretation of historical events or evidence, often in a way that alters the widely accepted version.
Misinformation: False or inaccurate information.
Disinformation: False information deliberately intended to mislead.
Marginalized Groups: Groups of people who are treated as insignificant or peripheral to society.
Systemic Oppression: Oppression that is built into the system, often normalized, and maintained through policies, practices, and norms.
Complicity: Involvement with others in an activity that is unlawful or morally wrong.