? GLOBAL SPEECH CONTROL AGENDA
The United Nations is now brazenly calling for “coordinated international motion” to police what it labels disinformation and hate speech on-line.
Let that sink in.
An unelected worldwide physique — with no democratic mandate over sovereign residents — is… pic.twitter.com/YRqissu1eR
— Jim Ferguson (@JimFergusonUK) February 23, 2026
The United Nations is now brazenly discussing “coordinated international motion” to fight what it defines as disinformation and hate speech on-line, and this shouldn’t be dismissed as some summary coverage debate. This can be a structural shift towards the internationalization of speech regulation, and that carries profound political and financial implications.
The UN’s current digital governance initiatives, together with its coverage briefs tied to the World Digital Compact, explicitly name for stronger worldwide cooperation to deal with on-line misinformation, platform accountability, and content material governance throughout borders. The acknowledged goal is to create safer digital areas and cut back dangerous content material, but the mechanism being proposed is coordinated oversight at a worldwide degree.
An unelected worldwide establishment proposing frameworks that affect what info is appropriate raises issues. The UN has no direct democratic mandate over the residents of particular person nations, but its coverage route more and more encourages governments and platforms to align with shared international requirements for speech moderation and data management. That is being framed as a needed response to misinformation, extremism, and social instability within the digital age. The globalists wish to management our skill to entry and course of info.
The core situation just isn’t whether or not misinformation exists. It at all times has. Each period has handled propaganda, rumors, and competing narratives. What’s completely different now’s the size and the proposed resolution of centralized digital oversight coordinated on the worldwide degree. Why ought to a choose few decide truth from fiction? The facility is unimaginable.
What one administration labels misinformation could later show correct, and what’s outlined as dangerous speech can shift with political priorities. Historical past is stuffed with examples the place dissenting views have been initially censored solely to later turn out to be accepted truths in issues of warfare coverage, financial forecasting, and public well being.
The long run regulatory battleground won’t be restricted to finance, taxation, or vitality, however more and more to info itself. In a digital economic system, whoever influences the stream of knowledge not directly influences public confidence, political legitimacy, and even financial conduct. The true query is not whether or not misinformation exists. The structural query is who defines reality, who enforces that definition, and the way far establishments are keen to go to keep up narrative authority in an period of declining international belief.
