I was going to be brave but; The Ink, May 21, 2025

ANAND GIRIDHARADAS , The Ink; I was going to be brave but

THE DARK AGES ARE BACK; The Atlantic, April 30, 2025

Alan Lightman, The Atlantic ; THE DARK AGES ARE BACK: Americans must insist on academic freedom, or risk losing what makes our nation great.

"The surrender of academic freedom in America and, in fact, freedom of all kinds may happen gradually, little by little. First with the disproportionate power of money and the wealthy who have it, then with attacks on the free press, the control of information, the weakening of checks and balances, the suppression of dissent, the surveillance of the population, and finally the normalization of repression. In George Orwell’s novel 1984, a superstate called Oceania is ruled by a dictator called Big Brother, who is supported by his personality cult and the Thought Police. The protagonist of the novel, Winston Smith, works for the state, at the Ministry of Truth, but he secretly hates the ruling regime. He joins what he thinks is a resistance group called the Brotherhood but which turns out to be part of the state apparatus. Smith is then arrested and subjected to months of brainwashing. Eventually, he is released and comes to believe that he loves Big Brother after all. This is what happens when darkness replaces light, when the freedom to think, dream, and invent is squashed. We cannot let that happen to us in America."

Trump Suggests Using National Guard Against ‘Enemy from Within’ on Election Day; Wall Street Journal, October 14, 2024

C. Ryan Barber and Jimmy Vielkind, Wall Street Journal; Trump Suggests Using National Guard Against ‘Enemy from Within’ on Election Day

"Donald Trump suggested deploying the National Guard or military to respond to what he termed the “enemy from within” on Election Day, saying in an interview that aired Sunday that he was concerned about the chaos wrought by "radical left lunatics".

Russia shuts down human rights group that preserved the legacy of Nobel laureate Andrei Sakharov; AP, August 18, 2023

 JIM HEINTZ, AP; Russia shuts down human rights group that preserved the legacy of Nobel laureate Andrei Sakharov

"Separate Russian courts on Friday ordered the liquidation of a human rights organization that preserved the legacy of Nobel Peace Prize laureate Andrei Sakharov and the arrest of a prominent election monitor, in the latest moves in a widespread crackdown on dissent. 

Sakharov, who died in 1989, was a key figure in developing the Soviet Union’s hydrogen bomb program but later become renowned for his activism in promoting human rights and freedom of conscience. He was awarded the Nobel prize in 1975 but was not allowed to travel to Norway to receive it. In 1980 he was sent into internal exile, which lasted six years.

The organization founded in his honor operated the Sakharov Center museum and archives in Moscow. Authorities declared it a “foreign agent” in 2014 and this year ordered the eviction of the center from its premises."

Russia sentences Kara-Murza, Putin critic and Post contributor, to 25 years; The Washington Post, April 17, 2023

Robyn Dixon, The Washington Post ; Russia sentences Kara-Murza, Putin critic and Post contributor, to 25 years

"In earlier comments on social media, Kara-Murza said he did not understand how criticizing the government could qualify as treason.

“It is incomprehensible to me how obvious and confirmed facts about the crimes committed during the aggression of Putin’s regime against Ukraine can be presented as ‘deliberately false information’ and the obvious lie — on the contrary, as the only truth.”"

It wasn’t just the National Archives. The Library of Congress also balked at a Women’s March photo.; The Washington Post, January 31, 2020

Joe Heim , The Washington Post; It wasn’t just the National Archives. The Library of Congress also balked at a Women’s March photo.

 

"The Library of Congress abandoned plans last year to showcase a mural-size photograph of demonstrators at the 2017 Women’s March in Washington because of concerns it would be perceived as critical of President Trump, according to emails obtained by The Washington Post...

 

Slayton said the decision to remove the photograph was made by leadership of the library’s Center for Exhibits and Interpretation. “No outside entities reviewed this exhibition’s content before it opened or opined on its content,” the spokeswoman wrote.

Librarian of Congress Carla Hayden was informed of the decision soon after and supported it, Slayton said. Hayden, who is in the fourth year of her 10-year term, was appointed by President Barack Obama in 2016 and confirmed by the Senate."

 

TikTok’s Beijing roots fuel censorship suspicion as it builds a huge U.S. audience; The Washington Post, September 15, 2019

Drew Harwell and Tony Romm, The Washington Post; TikTok’s Beijing roots fuel censorship suspicion as it builds a huge U.S. audience

"TikTok’s surging popularity spotlights the tension between the Web’s global powers: the United States, where free speech and competing ideologies are held as (sometimes messy) societal bedrocks, and China, where political criticism is forbidden as troublemaking."

Do You Have Concerns about Plan S? Then You Must be an Irresponsible, Privileged, Conspiratorial Hypocrite; The Scholarly Kitchen, November 26, 2018

Rick Anderson, The Scholarly Kitchen; Do You Have Concerns about Plan S? Then You Must be an Irresponsible, Privileged, Conspiratorial Hypocrite

"Ultimately, though, what is most concerning about Plan S is not the behavior of those hell-bent on defending it by any means necessary. That’s just par for the course. More important is the way in which researchers themselves — the people whose work and whose freedom to choose will be directly affected by its implementation — seem to have been excluded from the process of formulating it. This shouldn’t be surprising, I guess, given the disdain in which authors and researchers are apparently held by Plan S’s creators. After all, as Science Europe’s Robert-Jan Smits puts it: “Why do we need Plan S? Because researchers are irresponsible.”

There you have it. The freedom to choose how to publish isn’t for everyone; it’s only for those who are “responsible” — which is to say, those who agree with Plan S."

Jamal Khashoggi chose to tell the truth. It’s part of the reason he’s beloved.; The Washington Post, October 7, 2018

David Ignatius, The Washington Post; Jamal Khashoggi chose to tell the truth. It’s part of the reason he’s beloved.

[Kip Currier: As I've mentioned to a few people lately--including my book editor, as I finish up a chapter on truth for my ethics textbook--this is a particularly challenging time to tackle the topics of truth, facts, news, and information assessment. The example of Saudi dissident Jamal Khashoggi--"disappeared" and presumed killed--painfully demonstrates both the importance of and potentially deadly stakes for those committed to promoting freedom of expression and truth telling, in the furtherance of human rights, equality, and democratic values.]

"George Orwell titled a regular column he wrote for a British newspaper in the mid-1940s “As I Please.” Meaning that he would write exactly what he believed. My Saudi colleague Jamal Khashoggi has always had that same insistent passion for telling the truth about his country, no matter what.

Khashoggi’s fate is unknown as I write, but his colleagues at The Post and friends around the world fear that he was murdered after he visited the Saudi consulate in Istanbul last Tuesday...

Khashogggi [sic] understood that he could keep his mouth shut and stay safe, because he had so many friends in the royal family. But it simply wasn’t in him.

Khashoggi wrote a column for the Post last year in which he described seeing some of his friends arrested and struggling with his conscience. “I said nothing. I didn’t want to lose my job or my freedom. I worried about my family. I have made a different choice now,” he wrote. He had made a decisive break with Mohammed bin Salman , choosing exile and honesty in his writings. His simple four-word explanation: “We Saudis deserve better.”"

China’s Great Leap Backward; The Atlantic, December 2016

James Fallows, The Atlantic; China’s Great Leap Backward:

"China’s internet, always censored and firewalled, is now even more strictly separated from the rest of the world’s than ever before, and becoming more so. China’s own internet companies (Baidu as a search engine rather than Google, WeChat for Twitter) are more heavily censored. Virtual private networks and other work-arounds, tolerated a decade ago—the academic who invented China’s “Great Firewall” system of censorship even bragged about the six VPNs he used to keep up on foreign developments—are now under governmental assault. When you find a network that works, you dare not mention its name on social media or on a website that could alert the government to its existence. “It’s an endless cat-and-mouse,” the founder of a California-based VPN company, which I’m deliberately not identifying, recently told me. “We figure out a new route or patch, and then they notice that people are using us and they figure out how to block it. Eventually they wear most users down.” On a multiweek visit to China early last year, I switched among three VPNs and was able to reach most international sites using my hotel-room Wi-Fi. On a several-day visit last December, the hassle of making connections was not worth it, and I just did without Western news sources.

China’s print and broadcast media have always been state-controlled and pro-government. But a decade ago I heard from academics and party officials that “reasonable” criticism from the press actually had an important safety-valve function, as did online commentary, in alerting the government to emerging problem spots.

Those days are gone. Every week or two the Chinese press carries warnings, more and more explicit, by President Xi Jinping and his colleagues that dissent is not permissible and the party’s interests come first."

Free speech is flunking out on college campuses; Washington Post, 10/22/15

Catherine Rampell, Washington Post; Free speech is flunking out on college campuses:

"Crippling the delivery of unpopular views is a terrible lesson to send to impressionable minds and future leaders, at Wesleyan and elsewhere. It teaches students that dissent will be punished, that rather than pipe up they should nod along. It also teaches them they might be too fragile to tolerate words that make them uncomfortable; rather than rebut, they should instead shut down, defund, shred, disinvite.

But the solution to speech that offends should always be more speech, not less."