A Call to Censorship: Christchurch Shooter Gets the Last Laugh


I fear things have gone too far to stop.

In what can only be stated as exactly what the man whose name I shall not utter — for the sake of letting his stupidity and racially divisive rhetoric languish in obscurity as he ought to — wanted, countries around the world have now engaged in a global online censorship campaign, “To Eliminate Terrorist and Violent Extremist Content Online”.

This plan, named the “Christchurch Call”, is everything that the shooter wanted and more. Not only have governments the world over now ensured that the man who committed this heinous act will have A GLOBAL INITIATIVE attached to his name and actions, but steps are now being taken to ensure that government action and censorship will be enacted in order to eliminate the very sort of dialogue that he discussed.

This plan, totalitarian as it is in nature, is a mistake, not for its supposedly noble aims, but because the people who envision it either have no idea how the internet works as a whole, or they do, and they recognize how utterly unenforceable what is being asked for really is.

A ban on this sort of content within the Western world could only be enforced by stripping someone of the right to internet access, unless we now intend to outlaw free Wi-Fi in coffee shops and library internet access. The very fact that web-hosting is cheap and easy to access, that dummy email accounts can be made with the click of a button, and that pretty much any idiot who wants to can set up a shell website with any number of free or cheap hosting solutions, now being able to solicit payment for their services through crypto-currency, and you have a problem which no government or social media website has the capacity to stop.

Routing solutions exist. Infrastructure solutions exist. You can outlaw whatever scum and villainy off the face of the earth that you so desire, but your law means nothing if it cannot be enforced, and not only can this policy not be enforced, it will have effects that are in direct detriment to the goals it sets out to achieve if attempted. Hammering down on the distribution of these materials and opinions will, if anything, lead to them becoming a many-headed hydra that will take similarly Herculean efforts just to keep at bay.

This of course doesn’t even begin to factor into account the massive costs involved in such a venture, both in time and capital. Police will be pulled away from dealing with real-life crime cases in order to deal with cyber crimes. Governments will demand higher taxes in order to pay for more officers to be trained in order to deal with this sort of content, and the expansionist bubble will grow ever bigger and ever more centralized.

It should speak as a clear and present warning to everyone that “knowingly possessing” the manifesto of the man first mentioned in this article is a crime punishable by up to 14 years in prison in New Zealand already. How much further will countries push this censorious action? How many more laws must be put in place to control the free spread of information? How many more justifications will be given to an ultimately futile action, which will no doubt be abused by those in power to keep their power, as such information control always has been?

Beyond all of this, why is no one asking the important question: Why are world governments doing exactly what the monster who shot up those mosques wanted? Could it possibly be because none of the people who are deciding to ban the proliferation of this sort of material actually read the material? Could this rush to condemnation just be yet another example of know-nothing career politicians missing the forest for the trees, as they unknowingly rush to do the bidding of a fascist accelerationist who wanted to bring about civil war?

Perhaps this then is the ultimate irony; that by attempting to silence terrorists, they’re facilitating the very goals of the man who was responsible for the massacre that their new initiative is named after.