You Can’t Read This Book

How free is free speech when fear and power dictate the boundaries of expression?

1. The Violent Backlash to Free Expression

In 1988, Salman Rushdie published The Satanic Verses, sparking an uproar in the Muslim world. While criticism was anticipated, the escalation to death threats and widespread violence was not. Iran's Ayatollah Khomeini issued a fatwa against Rushdie, deeming his death necessary, and protests erupted globally.

The violent reaction served as a method to suppress dissenting voices under religious pretexts. Bookshops carrying The Satanic Verses faced bombings, and fear silenced publishing houses and authors. Governments like India’s proactively banned the book to avoid instigating more violence and preserve political favor with Muslim voters.

Religious leaders wielding fear have long deterred discussions challenging their authority. This tactic results in self-censorship, as evidenced by cases like Theo Van Gogh’s murder for critiquing Islam and Kåre Bluitgen's inability to find illustrators for a book discussing Muhammad.

Examples

• The Satanic Verses faced bans in multiple countries, including India and Pakistan.
• Bombings targeted bookshops associated with “blasphemous” literature.
• Theo Van Gogh, a filmmaker critical of Islam, was assassinated in 2004.

2. Fear Leads to Liberal Self-Censorship

In the aftermath of Rushdie's ordeal, even Western liberals withdrew support for free speech in certain contexts. The fear of violent reprisal created a chilling effect, where potential supporters shifted their focus away from defending controversial works and toward investigating broader societal issues.

University liberals chose easier battles, such as criticizing racism and sexism, while avoiding direct attacks on radical Islam's restrictive ideologies. This selective criticism further deepened the reluctance of writers, journalists, and academics to address sensitive topics.

Journalists became wary of reporting crimes by Islamist groups while amplifying criticisms of Western powers during conflicts like the Iraq War. Such selective reporting emphasized self-preservation over contributing to balanced discourse.

Examples

• Robert Hughes’ book, Culture of Complaint, reflects on liberals avoiding dangerous topics.
• News on Western military misconduct in Iraq overshadowed atrocities by Islamist extremists.
• Writers preferentially targeted Christianity while ignoring Islamic authoritarianism.

3. Religious Leaders Amplify Offenses to Stifle Criticism

Religious leaders often frame themselves as victims to keep their followers united and enraged. By inventing or magnifying slights, they convince their audience that their beliefs are under constant threat, justifying strict measures to silence dissent.

India offers an example where Hindu conservative groups targeted Muslim artist M.F. Husain for perceived insults in his paintings. Accusations against Husain incited violence and reinforced sectarian divides.

By responding disproportionately to minor incidents, authoritarian regimes discourage others from voicing opinions. This accruing control feeds the narrative of religious victimization while suppressing liberal ideas.

Examples

• Religious mobs in India vandalized galleries showcasing M.F. Husain’s art.
• Iran's leadership punished journalists who questioned Islamic tenets.
• Artists and writers refrain from projects deemed "blasphemous" out of fear.

4. Economic Power Curbs Speech in Authoritarian States

Countries such as China and Russia exemplify how growing wealth centralizes control and suppresses dissent. These governments leverage media monopolies and legal constraints to filter out criticism.

State-controlled companies dominate key industries, sponsoring governments that own the press. Whistleblowers and activists face physical threats or financial repercussions when confronting corruption within these states.

For example, Russia’s oligarchs have become untouchable entities within their country's power hierarchy, employing private armies or co-opting media outlets to maintain dominance.

Examples

• China bans independent journalism while proliferating state-sponsored propaganda.
• The 2008 recession deepened media control among oligarchic states like Russia.
• Critics in Saudi Arabia face imprisonment for challenging leadership.

5. Flawed Whistleblower Protections in Democracies

Workplace censorship maintains its own justice system, characterized by limited whistleblower protections. Laws in nations like Britain prioritize employers’ interests, making it arduous for employees to expose unethical practices.

For instance, whistleblowers risk being silenced by gag orders or confidentiality agreements. This legal framework deters employees from disclosing critical flaws in industries, perpetuating corruption or unsafe practices.

During the 2008 financial crisis, banks avoided scrutiny for their unsound practices due to the fear instilled in employees by leaders like Frederick Goodwin, infamous for bullying subordinates into silence.

Examples

• British whistleblower protections rarely safeguard employees in practice.
• Gag orders block investigations, as seen in unsafe medical practices within the NHS.
• Employees in banking feared reprisal, leading to unchecked market risks pre-2008.

6. Libel Laws Shape Speech Beyond Borders

In Britain, outdated libel laws are manipulated by the elite to stifle speech. Claimants rarely need to prove harm; instead, the burden lies on defendants to prove their accusations as truthful.

These protections extend globally, especially as online publications accessible in England are subject to its libel laws. Well-funded individuals use these rules to pressure journalists into dropping stories deemed critical.

For example, lawyers representing foreign oligarchs have silenced many British writers, either eliminating their work entirely or diluting their dissenting tone through fear of lawsuits.

Examples

• English libel law origins date back to King Edward I’s decree in 1275.
• Foreign oligarchs use London property ownership to file lawsuits.
• Newspapers often back off stories targeting the rich due to lawsuit risks.

7. The Internet Challenges Traditional Censorship

The arrival of the internet marked a seismic shift in information dissemination. Journalists and whistleblowers now had an independent platform to publish, evading the clutches of government or corporate suppression.

The second Iraq War illustrated this change. Sources like WikiLeaks revealed classified information to the public without needing access to traditional media outlets, highlighting both corruption and systemic flaws.

Despite this freedom, governments have adapted by seeking soft power on the internet, using subtle means to manipulate narratives or restrict access to dissenting voices.

Examples

• WikiLeaks published detailed reports on government misdeeds, including wartime harm.
• False narratives are disseminated online to misinform or suppress oppositional movements.
• The Clinton administration’s attempt to restrict internet content was thwarted legally.

8. Governments Exploit Internet Vulnerabilities

While internet discourse seemed untouchable at first, powerful figures found ways to infiltrate and influence the digital realm. Governments sidestep direct control by attacking internet infrastructure or pressuring businesses behind dissenting sites.

China's Great Firewall and Russia’s systematic takeovers of internet platforms stifle freedom. Meanwhile, extremist opposition to figures like Ayaan Hirsi Ali showcases how adversaries can leverage technology for harassment campaigns.

This strategy poses unique challenges for free speech—though individuals can share opinions, resourceful entities can manipulate frameworks to suppress or obscure competing narratives.

Examples

• China blocks access to major Western platforms like Google and YouTube.
• Activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali faced frequent online harassment for criticizing Islam.
• Russia pressures internet service providers to follow government-imposed censorship.

9. The Internet’s Noise Challenges Free Expression

Surprisingly, the openness of the internet itself creates problems for free speech. With millions of users expressing their views, getting any single message noticed becomes increasingly difficult.

The noise online undermines efforts to have important stories heard. Activists must work harder than ever to draw attention to topics previously championed by mass media, leaving vital issues underrepresented.

The internet's democratization of publishing makes mass influence harder to achieve, and corporate-backed campaigns often drown out individual voices due to better resources.

Examples

• Blogs rarely gain traction compared to state-funded media sites.
• Activist campaigns struggle for visibility amid online clutter.
• Independent media outlets find it difficult to compete with traditional corporations.

Takeaways

1. Advocate for stronger legal reforms to protect whistleblowers and free speech in workplaces and public platforms alike.
2. Educate yourself and others about how to navigate censorship practices, both online and off, to promote more balanced discussions.
3. Support independent journalism and platforms that provide alternative perspectives excluded by mainstream outlets.