Przeczytaj ten tekst po Polsku.
Clearly, “militant democracy” is flourishing not only in Poland but is on the offensive across the entire EU.
Let’s make one thing clear: AfD is neither my ally nor my friend. However Germany makes its bed, so it shall lie in it. If AfD is an illegal organization, acting against German law and the constitution, I assume its members will soon be heading to prison! Of course, I’m jesting here, having a bit of fun, because no one has yet outlawed the AfD, and all indications suggest it won’t be outlawed anytime soon—for legal and constitutional reasons, it’s a mission impossible.
So what is Mr. Regnier’s problem, that he’s growling at Elon Musk like an engine at full throttle? The issue is that every spot on Europe’s political couch has long been occupied by seasoned leftist veterans. Perhaps, out of their graciousness, they might allow someone to sit on their lap (a token right-winger), but giving up a spot on the couch? Never! It’s warm and cozy there, after all. Democracy doesn’t reign so that those who aren’t meant to win can prevail! Thus, democracy must be defended, and the best way to defend it is by fighting for it. Hence the coining of the beautifully ironic term “militant democracy” (my own theory), which should be read literally: “Try taking our spot on the couch, and we’ll happily rip your cojones off.”
Our comrades in the West have learned from history that the “iron grip” method is ineffective in the long run, so now they’re trying a softer approach. They’ll fight for democracy, and the first casualty of this fight is…freedom of speech. And that’s precisely what we’re witnessing in Thomas Regnier’s words. He’s not speaking between the lines, nor even between the letters—he’s hitting us squarely between the eyes: W-E-W-I-L-L-I-M-P-L-E-M-E-N-T C-E-N-S-O-R-S-H-I-P! And we’ll defend our spot on the couch as if it were our independence! In other words, Europeans can choose any car color they like, as long as it’s black.
Apparently, Regnier doesn’t recall Karl Marx’s (the pioneer of communism) words: “A censorship law is not a law but a police measure. And it’s a bad police measure because it fails to achieve what it intends and achieves what it doesn’t intend.”
Even now, European internet users are trying to outsmart content-verifying algorithms. Instead of saying “blacks,” they write “blues”; instead of “Jews,” they write “Romans.” This brings to mind the old (and not at all good) times when, under communism, one couldn’t speak ill of Russians, but it was perfectly acceptable to complain about Russian dumplings being unpalatable. Everyone knew what was really being talked about and laughed at. Aberration? Certainly. And it’s making a roaring comeback.
Alberto Manguel, the Argentine intellectual, wrote: „Populist regimes want to take away our memory, so they deem books unnecessary luxuries. Totalitarian regimes don’t want us to think, so they ban, threaten, and censor. Both aim to make us stupid and meekly accept our degradation. They encourage us to consume trash. In such a situation, reading becomes a subversive act.”
