We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Guess how this German politician plans to revitalise diversity of opinion online

“Leading German politician calls for the state to issue “revocable social media licenses” for the privilege of commenting online”. The eponymous Eugyppius of Eugyppius: A Plague Chronicle describes how Mario Voigt, the head of the centre-right CDU in Thüringen, plans to protect democracy:

Stung by this failure [an uninspiring performance in a debate against an AfD politician called Björn Höcke], Voigt has set off to find other means of defending democracy. This week, in the Thüringen state parliament, he gave an amazing speech outlining a five-point plan to protect German democracy from that other great menace, the free and open internet:

So how do we protect democracy in the area of social media? There are five approaches:

Ideally, we should agree to ban bots and to make the use of fake profiles a criminal offence.

There is also the matter of requiring people to use their real names, because freedom of expression should not be hidden behind pseudonyms.

Then there’s the question of whether we should create revocable social media licences for every user, so that dangerous people have no place online.

We need to consider how we can regulate algorithms so that we can revitalise the diversity of opinions in social networks.

And we also have to improve media skills.

For all that Björn Höcke is supposed to be a “populist authoritarian” opposed to representative government, I’ve never heard him say anything this crazy. Voigt, meanwhile, is a leading politician for the officially “democratic” Christian Democratic Union (you know they are democratic because the word is in their name), and he’s actually dreaming of requiring Germans to obtain state-issued licenses for permission to post their thoughts to the internet.

I added the emphasis to show that the bit about diversity of opinion wasn’t just me or Eugyppius being sarcastic. Mario Voigt really did advocate for revocable social media licences to get those people he deems dangerous off the internet and in the next breath say that he wants the people still allowed to be on the internet to have a greater diversity of opinions.

16 comments to Guess how this German politician plans to revitalise diversity of opinion online

  • Mr Ed

    I can just picture Herr Voigt saying ‘And when we win the election, you will be brought to account.’

    And then turning to you, Frau Solent, to say ‘Your name will also go on the list’.

    But of course, Herr Voigt will remain on the Party List after this.

  • Discovered Joys

    The original aphorism was ‘Publish and be damned’ (the Duke of Wellington’ indifference to scandal being published about him). That is slowly changing into ‘Be damned so no publication’. Of course those with the thinnest skins will be making the judgement.

  • Paul Marks

    This man is from the CDU (supposedly conservative), the SPD in Germany has long been opposed to Freedom of Speech – but they are a party of the left, the heir of Robespierre and so on who hold that only Progressive speech should be allowed (remember Robespierre opposed the death penalty for murder – but supported the death penalty for Reactionary speech or for violating price controls, this is all quite consistent if one starts from Progressive philosophical assumptions).

    It is unfortunate that the CDU seems to be going down the same pro censorship path as the SPD and the Greens, defining “democracy” (as the American leftist establishment do) as the rule of Progressive forces with Reactionaries, who might actually do what the people want (such as stop mass immigration and oppose the undermining of national culture), strictly censored and banned – the people must not (according to the founder of the modern left – Rousseau) be allowed to just vote for anything they want (otherwise a conservative society might emerge), the people must be guided by the Lawgiver, it is the Lawgiver (like Plato’s Gold Guardians – Plato being a strong supporter of censorship, so that his rewriting of traditional Greek stories would not be challenged by people who knew the originals) who is educated and enlightened enough to find the true “General Will” – rather than the “Will of All” (which might be “racist”, “sexist”, “homophobic” or whatever not Progressive like Plato or Rousseau).

    Aristotle defined a good polity as one dominated by independent farmers and craftsmen who had strong families (rather than handing over their children to be raised in common – as Plato advocated and Rousseau actually did, although the children of Rousseau most likely died as he handed them to a foundling home which was known for what today might be called post birth abortions, even post birth by quite a few years), but this would be like Swiss Appenzell Innerrhoden (well a few decades ago anyway) – not what Plato and Rousseau had in mind (no Gold Guardians of Lawgiver at the annual meeting where the independent and reactionary farmers and craftsmen wave their swords).

  • Paul Marks

    It must not be thought that all this is confined to Germany – the American Democrats (and the RINOs) are just as committed to censorship (a couple of appointments to the Supreme Court and the 1st Amendment, and the rest of the Bill of Rights, is dead) and other tyranny – in order to prevent “racists”, “sexists”, “homophobes”, “Islamophobes” (whatever – and they do not see the contradiction between celebrating Islam and condemning “sexism”, “homophobia” and-so-on) exercising power.

    Reactionaries must either be prevented from being elected (hence the absurd charges against Donald John Trump – which the Progressive courts pretend are real) or prevented from exercising power if they are elected – by the Civil Service and the institutionally corrupt courts undercutting elected Reactionaries.

    In the United kingdom the Economist magazine only this week restated its view that both national independence and democracy were “bad Tory ideas” (John Bright and other 19th century Classical Liberals would have been confused by these claims) with the Economist magazine holding that unelected international judges, and experts, should make the key decisions on immigration, health (very broadly defined “health” – the Economist magazine supports the totalitarian World Health Organisation), and so on.

    And the “Byline Times” (pushed hard by the local supermarket in my home town) holds that Islamic sex slavery is NOT the real problem – but, rather, “far right” “grooming” of “child abuse victims” (at least they admit that the child abuse victims exist) is the problem – I will write that again, to them (the “Byline Times”) the sexual abuse of children and young women is NOT the real problem, the real bad thing is the supposed exploitation of this abuse by the “far right” who are “grooming” the victims to be opposed to Islam, and to lead the rest of the population to be opposed to Islam – to follow the line of such supposedly dreadful people as John Bright M.P., Prime Minister Gladstone and Prime Minister Winston Churchill.

    I can remember when the “far right” were supposed to be the people who hate Jews – now Peter Oborne (oh yes he writes for the “Byline Times” and other such “Progressive” publications, including ones with links to Qatar and the Islamic Republic of Iran) and co are held up as Progressive icons for hating Jews. For example claiming, in his book on Iran, that the Americans got rid of the Iranian government in 1953 in order to help “Israel” – a false statement by Mr Oborne, who Michael White of the Guardian says has a very strong sense of “right and wrong” – if that is true, it is unfortunate that Mr Oborne then chooses to side with wrong – with evil (such as the Islamic Republic of Iran regime – whose nuclear weapons plans to destroy the Jews and other foes, Mr Oborne has been falsely denying for years).

    Actually it was a double false statement by Mr Oborne – as the CIA effort to get rid of the pro Soviet government in Iran in 1953 was a failure, it was a coup about a week later that succeeded (the CIA claimed credit for the later coup rather than admit they had failed), and the CIA efforts in Iran were nothing to do with helping “Israel” (sorry the Jews are not behind everything).

    If only the AfD (the Alternative for Germany) stopped opposing Islam and decided that the “capitalist Jews” were to blame for everything (perhaps a few of the AfD DO believe this – for example thinking that the Jews are behind the mass immigration into Western Europe, because a few of the pro immigration groups contain some Jews – if one Jew is six feet tall, then all Jews must be six feet tall) then the Progressive forces of the world (such as the Byline Times) might be full of praise for the AfD.

    As for real conservative German voices such as the late Erik Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn – I doubt that people of any party, CDU, SPD, Green, or AfD, read their works today.

  • 1. Ideally, we should agree to ban bots and to make the use of fake profiles a criminal offence.

    Can Mario Voigt please CC: Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg on this as they are having a terrible time with bots on X/Twitter and Facebook. I’m absolutely sure they would love to hear the suggestions of a German Political talking head on the matter.

    2. There is also the matter of requiring people to use their real names, because freedom of expression should not be hidden behind pseudonyms.

    Because all more serious problems have been dealt with, so we’re down to the problem of “people saying hurty words on the Interweb”?

    3. Then there’s the question of whether we should create revocable social media licences for every user, so that dangerous people have no place online.

    Because what we really need for “Freedom of Speech” is the ability to silence those we don’t like, especially that which goes against the narrative. Death threats from Islamic nutjobs will still get a pass though.

    4. We need to consider how we can regulate algorithms so that we can revitalise the diversity of opinions in social networks.

    Because it’s the algorithm that causes the problems, not the censorious bastards trying (and failing) to manage a narrative of doubtful truthfulness which some parts of the Demos refuse to accept.

    5. And we also have to improve media skills.

    Primarily though, we need to manage Mario Voigt’s tenuous grip on reality.

  • Y. Knott

    John, it’s up to the German electorate to massage Mario Voigt’s tenuous grip on reality – and I gotta’ be honest, it looks like they’re doing a pretty decent job of it. I hope when AfD gets in, it’ll create employment opportunities for many of their voters by coming-up with innovative ways to recycle wind turbine blades…

  • Roué le Jour

    2. There is also the matter of requiring people to use their real names, because freedom of expression should not be hidden behind pseudonyms.

    We should probably get rid of the secret ballot as well, so I can punish all the bastards that voted against me.

  • pete

    It is important to understand that people like Mr Voight use the word diversity in an unusual way.

    To them it simply means things they approve of, so the greatest possible diversity of opinion in public debate is achieved when that debate consists entirely of opinions they like.

  • Steven R

    The men who wrote the Federalist Papers and the Anti-Federalist Papers used pseudonyms. If Publius was good enough for Hamilton, Madison, and Jay then I’m pretty sure Newbmaster69 is good enough for some kid who wants to be able to say what’s on his mind without going to prison or being socially cancelled and losing his job over it.

  • Martin

    Just when I was convinced the Conservatives have become the lamest ‘centre-right’ party in the world, here comes the German CDU to remind me they’re even more pathetic! At least Germany have got a good rightist party (AfD). In the UK, Reform are almost as depressing as the Tories.

  • Paul Marks

    Martin – just over week ago a fellow councilor and myself were swapping stories of our suspension by the charming people at “Central Office”, but note this was suspension – we were not expelled. We may be at some time in the future (neither of us are going to turn into lickspittles who watch every word we say – life is not worth living, if it is lived on one’s knees), who knows, but not today.

    The Reform Party was supposed to be a more Conservative alternative – but when a leftist group complained about the comments of some Reform Party members out-they-went (no due process, nothing – just the standard hypocritical and contradictory “we support freedom of speech – but…” statement), it turns out that Reform is not a political party – it is a limited company or something.

    Reclaim (Mr Fox) is said to have a sincere belief in Freedom of Speech, and denounced the Covid “vaccines” – but Mr Fox is not, it is said, a good organiser.

    Political parties are like tribes – well not “like” tribes, they are tribes. It takes a lot more than a few good people with a vision – it takes lots of people in each community. It takes families over generations.

    Each Constituency should manage its own affairs – they know local people best.

  • Patrick Brady

    Hmmm…

    Benjamin Franklin used quite a few amusing pseudonyms and he owned the newspaper they were printed in – CRIMINAL in the new Germany.

    Say goodbye to Alice Addertongue, BF Crocker, Anthony Afterwit, Busy Body, Caelia Shortface and Silence Dogood all penned by Benjamin Franklin….

  • Martin

    The Reform Party was supposed to be a more Conservative alternative – but when a leftist group complained about the comments of some Reform Party members out-they-went (no due process, nothing – just the standard hypocritical and contradictory “we support freedom of speech – but…” statement), it turns out that Reform is not a political party – it is a limited company or something.

    I find it curious that Reform would make great efforts to get Lee Anderson to join them after he was suspended by the Tories for controversial comments about Sadiq Khan, and then after that as soon as they find out (courtesy of the Communists at Hope Not Hate)a candidate has made some slightly provocative tweet they get purged. Tice will moan about Hope Not Hate but does what they want anyway. Totally breaks any idea that Reform are any brave kind of non-woke party that sticks it to the PC. Most of the ‘controversial ‘ comments that led to purges are milder than what Anderson said about Khan.

    I can’t quite fathom if Tice is just politically stupid or if his actions reflect something else.

  • Paul Marks

    Martin – I do not know.

    Nothing that these various party H.Q.s (including my own – although I have never visited the place in my 45 years as an active party member, who knows what goes on there) do, makes any sense to me. Perhaps if I was a London person what the various political machines might make sense to me – but I am not a London person (for example I do not understand why “Central Office” regards Mayor K. as some sort of saint who should not be subjected to the insults that have been normal in politics for centuries and are used every day against Conservatives, there was never such a rule about not using harsh language against Boris Johnson when he was Mayor).

    Lee Anderson I have met – and he struck me as an honest man, Richard Tice I do not know.

    I do not know why Mr Tice gave in to the Marxist “Hope Not Hate” (which is motivated by HATE) – he must know that the Marxists want him dead, or rotting in a GULAG somewhere, and that nothing he can do will change their desire to destroy him.

    Conservatives are also sometimes a bit off in their judgement – for example a Conservative Member of Parliament said to me (only a couple of weeks ago) that being a Communist “meant something different in the 1930s” (he was referring to Oppenheimer – made into a hero figure by a recent film) – it did NOT mean something different in the 1930s, Communists in the 1930s wanted to steal everything and to exterminate all “Reactionaries” – this is what being a Marxist means.

    The idea that Communists “did not know” what was happening in the Soviet Union, the many millions of deaths, is a lie – they did know. And it is what they wanted to do (and still want to do) in Britain and America.

    Even my father, Harry Marks, knew – which is why he left the Communist Party in the 1930s. And Harry Marks was a lot less well connected than Oppenheimer was.

  • Paul Marks

    As for “democratic socialism” – if this was a good idea than Pine Ridge and the other Reservations, that have had democratic socialism – communal ownership of land and so on, for 90 years (since the Act of 1934 handing things over to elected tribal councils) would be a success.

    Pine Ridge is NOT a success – and nor would be the endless collective ownership “communities” that the Hollywood types believe in and push in their films and television shows (but do not practice).

    However, there is one sense it which Pine Ridge is indeed a success – indoctrination.

    Some 90% of the vote in this socialist Hell-Hole went to Biden-Harris in 2020 – no vote rigging was necessary in such places, where even the very idea of private property, or not living off benefits and free services, is totally alien now – although in the 1920s the Native American populations were assimilating (that has gone down the Memory Hole now – even the Native American Vice President of the United States, Vice President Curtis, is largely forgotten).

  • NickM

    This might sound exceptionally odd in the context. But… I comment and produce here and elsewhere as NickM but my first big internet experience was in gaming where I built a website for a gaming community and there I went by Captain Kronos which kinda fitted with the game (Hardwar – yes, it was that long ago..) and I wrote it in “in-Universe” slang so the name kinda fitted as well. So, technically could this land me in trouble with such laws? It is a serious question about something I just thought was a bit of fun and a chance to learn web-design. Hardwar is a space trading/combat sim set on a dystopian Titan in the future.

    PS And what happens to trans-folk. Is Danny gonna get in trouble for now identifying as Daphne?

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>