UN Secretary General wants international code of speech
It should have received a lot more attention than it did. A few weeks ago, UN Secretary General AntÃ³nio Guterres released a report that would limit free speech on issues such as global warming, the pandemic and other areas favored by internationalists. Extract from “Our common program:”
Now is the time to end the âinfodemicâ that plagues our world by defending a common and empirically supported consensus around facts, science and knowledge. The “war on science” must end. All political and budgetary decisions must be supported by science and expertise, and I call for a global code of conduct that promotes the integrity of public information.
It looks strangely like the imposition of codes of speech that would stifle heterodox opinions and favor the orthodoxies favored by UN bureaucrats.
Do you think I’m exaggerating? Decide for yourself (emphasis added):
26. The Internet has changed our societies as profoundly as the printing press has, demanding a deep reimagining of the ethics and mentalities with which we approach knowledge, communication and cohesion. In addition to the potential for more accessible information and rapid communication and consultation, the digital age, especially social media, has also increased fragmentation and âecho chambersâ.
Objectivity, or even the idea that people can aspire to discover the best available truth, is increasingly questioned. The the goal of balancing opposing views may come at the expense of impartiality and evidence, distorting public debate. The ability to cause widespread disinformation and undermine scientifically established facts is an existential risk for humanity.
Guterres really says he wants an official “echo chamber” of the approved speech. So he writes:
While vigorously defending the right to freedom of expression everywhere, we must also encourage companies to develop a common policy, empirically consensus on the public good of facts, science and knowledge. (His emphasis.)
The second part of this sentence belies the first. How is freedom of expression defended when the powers that be determine the “consensus” of “facts, science and knowledge”? Moreover, this approach would be deeply anti-science, which is a method of determining facts about the natural world that requires dissent, skepticism and the ongoing challenges to be effective.
Guterres wants the UN to control the speech:
A global code of conduct that promotes the integrity of public information could be explored with states, media and regulators, facilitated by the United Nations. With recent concerns over trust and mistrust related to technology and the digital space, it is also time to understand, better regulate and manage our digital commons as a global public good.
This really means that internet and social media companies have the power to exclude unapproved perspectives from cyberspace – you know, the kind of censorship that Twitter engaged in when it blocked the broadcast of the UN. New York PostThe precise story of Hunter Biden and YouTube’s “laptop” removing videos of scientists discussing COVID in a different way than those promoted by the WHO.
Guterres has shown where the globalists want to take us. Fortunately, the UN currently does not have the legal or coercive power to impose codes of speech. For the sake of freedom, we have to keep it that way.