Free Speech Changes Hands: How a Left-Wing Cause Became a Right-Wing Brand

2026-06-20T00:00:00+00:00

Free speech has shifted from being primarily a left wing cause to a right wing one but the broader pattern across different countries is that governments tend to abandon it once they hold power.

For most of the last century free speech was associated with defending groups that those in power wanted to silence such as socialists, labor organizers and protesters. These were largely legal and political fights against the state led by people outside of government.

In the 2010s it changed changed: universities, media organizations, and technology platforms came to be seen as culturally liberal, the political right increasingly positioned itself as the censored side, and free speech became associated with conservative politics.

A useful test of whether free speech is treated as a genuine principle is whether it is defended even for disagreeable speech once a group has the power to punish that speech. Recent government actions are relevant here.

In the UK individuals have been imprisoned over social media posts. The Labor government defended these decisions, while Reform get to present themselves as defenders of free speech. The UK and Australia both denied entry to foreign commentators while introducing terrifying "online safety" legislation barring youth from large parts of the internet and setting precedent for everyone having to monkey up an ID to use the internet.

Identity verification is insanely relevant to free speech, not only privacy. Anonymity allows people to speak when doing so carries risk, including whistle-blowers, dissidents, and critics of those in power. When a verified identity is attached to online activity, speech can be tracked, which can discourage expression without any explicit ban. This is often described as a chilling effect.

The hacktivist collective Anonymous is an example of this principle in practice. The group has no formal leadership, membership, or public faces, and is associated with the Guy Fawkes mask. It illustrates how anonymity can function as a form of protection, allowing collective action that is harder for authorities to attribute to specific individuals.

A common feature of these measures is that they are not framed as censorship. They are presented as safety or child-protection policies, but they build infrastructure—databases, verification systems, and surveillance capacity—that can later be used to restrict speech. This occurs under both left- and right-leaning governments, and such systems are typically inherited by whichever government follows.

The overall point is that free speech tends to be championed by those out of power and deprioritized by those in power. A consistent position involves defending the principle itself, including anonymity, rather than only defending it when it favors one's own side.

The VPuNk REpoRt!! - censorship

Free Speech Changes Hands: How a Left-Wing Cause Became a Right-Wing Brand