? 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 latest 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 said goal is to create safer digital areas and scale 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 data 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 knowledge management. That is being framed as a mandatory response to misinformation, extremism, and social instability within the digital age. The globalists wish to management our skill to entry and course of data.
The core situation 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 dimensions 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 might 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 had been initially censored solely to later develop into accepted truths in issues of battle coverage, financial forecasting, and public well being.
The long run regulatory battleground won’t be restricted to finance, taxation, or power, however more and more to data itself. In a digital financial system, whoever influences the circulate of data not directly influences public confidence, political legitimacy, and even financial conduct. The actual query is not whether or not misinformation exists. The structural query is who defines fact, who enforces that definition, and the way far establishments are prepared to go to take care of narrative authority in an period of declining international belief.
