Mediaboss Marketing

During a passionate gathering at the 2024 Right to Read Celebration, held in Miamis premier art museum along the Biscayne Bay, the battle against censorship and book bans took center stage. As Florida contends with a staggering number of banned books, the June 8 event aimed to rally supporters and honor those fighting against the suppression of literature.

Thank you all for being reasonable, literate, book-loving Americans on the right side of this historic battle against censorship, said MSNBCs Katie Phang, setting the tone for the evening that was organized by The New Republic.

Phang emphasized the alarming trend of book bans sweeping across America with 4,240 unique titles banned last year across the U.S., an increase of almost 65% since 2022. According to data from the American Library Associations Office for Intellectual Freedom (OIF), titles representing the voices and lived experiences of LGBTQIA+ people and BIPOC made up 47% of those targeted in censorship attempts. Phang drew parallels to past eras of censorship, invoking literary giants like Mark Twain, Virginia Woolf, and Toni Morrison, whose works continue to face suppression.

The event honored booksellers, teachers, librarians, writers, and organizations working tirelessly to make books available in places where they are being challenged and banned with the Toni Morrison Awards for Courage, named after the Nobel and Pulitzer Prize-winning author known for her advocacy of free speech.

Its important to amplify how prevalent and destructive these book bans are, said National Book Award-winning author Jacqueline Woodson. From the East Coast to the West Coast, from north to south, we are finding bans and challenges in every state in the U.S. This is devastating for our young people whose choices about what they can read become more limited with every ban. And it is devastating for all people because its an attempt at erasure. Of our stories. Of our histories. Of truth.

Woodson was one of the 15 recipients of the award, in addition to Texas booksellers Valerie Koehler and Charley Rejsek, organizations including Miami Freedom Project, Moms for Libros, and PRISM FL, among others.

The event also featured panels discussing the state of the nation from the perspective of teachers and librarians and with writers whose books are regularly challenged. In one panel, Katie Blankenship of PEN America highlighted the gravity of the situation in Florida, where discriminatory legislation has targeted marginalized communities and eroded academic freedom. Despite the challenges, she expressed optimism in the resilience of Floridians fighting against censorship.

Another panel, featuring teacher Renee OConnor and authors Ellen Hopkins, George M. Johnson, and Jacqueline Woodson, delved into their personal experiences and the impact of their works on readers across the nation.

What used to be in the dark is now in the light, said Johnson, an award-winning Black nonbinary writer. And so I feel like this is just part of my duty to shine a light on these people who existed and never got to live their lives in which I get to do right now.

Johnson, whose memoir All Boys Arent Blue has garnered acclaim and controversy, discussed the importance of representation and visibility in literature, particularly for marginalized communities. His upcoming project, Flamboyants: The Queer Harlem Renaissance I Wish Id Known, aims to shine a light on the often overlooked contributions of LGBTQIA+ individuals throughout history.

I was always trying to find bits and pieces of myself in heterosexual characters, and now I get to put these queer characters back into the world, said Johnson. They try to act like were some new phenomena when, realistically, were just more public now.

Woodson, acclaimed for her award-winning childrens books, shared the inspiration behind her acclaimed work The Day You Begin. Rooted in personal experiences, the book delicately navigates themes of diversity and acceptance, providing young readers with a poignant exploration of identity and belonging.

I got braver with what stories I wanted to tell, Woodson said. And I think I got braver in the world of understanding that story isnt just narrative on the page. It is the way we nurture other writers of the global community. Its the way we put ourselves out there to fight what we think is wrong in the world.

Just days after the event on June 10, a group of parents filed a lawsuit against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis administration after one of the parents wasnt allowed to defend a book that was removed from the shelves in their school district. Meanwhile, in Texas, an appeals court ordered Llano County to return 17 books back to their shelves, including books that deal with racism and transgender issues, following a lawsuit by library patrons.

This ban isnt just about the books, but its about the war on womens bodies, its about the war on Black folks, you know, all of this is connected, Woodson said. We need to speak up. And our characters can do that for us.

Read the original:
Authors and advocates rally against book bans in Miami - Prism

The International Youth and Students for Social Equality (IYSSE) are standing a slate of candidates for elections to the student parliament (StuPa) at Berlins Humboldt University (HU) to take place June 18-19, 2024. Come to our next event June 17, at 7 p.m.: The false accusation of antisemitism and the trivialisation of Nazi crimes at HU, (Audimax II at Campus Nord of HU, Philippstrasse 13, 10117 Berlin).

Since the brutal police operations against peaceful student protests at the Free University and against the student occupation of the Institute of Social Sciences at Berlins Humboldt University (HU) in April and May, the attacks on opponents of the war and critics of the genocide in Gaza have become ever more severe. The IYSSE is calling on students and university staff to protest against the massive restrictions on freedom of expression and academic freedom.

The scenes of aggressive police violence that took place at HU in May set a shocking precedent. As in a dictatorial regime, police officers beat up and arrested peaceful students who were protesting against the pro-war policy. A journalist from the Berliner Zeitung, who clearly identified himself as a member of the press, was also brutally beaten.

During the eviction of the student protest at the Institute of Social Sciences (ISW) on the orders of the Berlin Senate (state executive), lawyer Benjamin Dsberg was also arrested, although he made himself recognisable as a lawyer. Criminal charges were brought against him and over 20 other people involved on suspicion of breach of the peace. The actions of the Berlin police have taken on a new quality, Dsberg told Tagesspiegel.

Indeed. The violent eviction of the ISW is now being used as a starting point to enforce an authoritarian police regime at the university. University management has filed criminal charges against the students involved for trespass and damage to property, as announced in a letter to HU staff and students on June 11.

The police are also investigating seven members of the RefRat/Asta (Student Union) of the HU for serious trespass. Those affected have applied to the student parliament for financial support for their legal fees. As they explain, it is the task of the student representatives to be present at events such as the ISW occupation: We deeply condemn the fact that representatives are now to be prosecuted for having fulfilled their role as student representatives.

The criminalisation of students and their representatives in the RefRat is intended to spread a climate of intimidation and fear. Anyone who protests peacefully or expresses criticism of the massacre in Gaza and the complicity of the German government is to be persecuted and silenced.

The attack on basic democratic rights such as freedom of expression and assembly is not only directed against students, but also against lecturers and professors. The latest revelations by broadcaster NDR show how aggressively the federal coalition government of the Social Democrats (SPD), Greens and Liberal Democrats (FDP) is trying to suppress any form of dissent from its political line. Internal emails show that Education Minister Bettina Stark-Watzinger (Free Democratic Party, FDP) wanted to take far-reaching authoritarian measures against academics in May.

After police officersstormed the Free Universityin April and used force to break up a peaceful Gaza protest camp organised by students, almost 400 professors and lecturers signed an open letter defending the students. The first signatories were joined by over 1,000 other lecturers. The Minister of Education then asked her departments to examine whether she could cancel funding already granted to the academics. She also looked for potentially criminally relevant statements in the open letter in order to use them against the lecturers.

This scandalous attack on academic freedom is a further step towards a right-wing dictatorship. HU doctoral student and political scientist Ilyas Saliba, who is researching authoritarian regimes in the Arab world, toldtaz: Checking whether it is possible to take action against disagreeable academics under criminal, service and funding law is an authoritarian practice. We know this from the Middle East, North Africa or Hungary, where critical scholars are denied a future perspective in science.

Naika Foroutan, professor of Social Sciences at HU, who co-signed the open letter and is therefore herself in the crosshairs of the federal government, emphasised totazthat research was primarily financed by third-party funding, which often comes from the Ministry of Education. Im now wondering whether projects submitted by my institute or by colleagues who signed the letter will be assessed differently or rejected outright.

The education ministers attempt to introduce a censorship regime through the back door initially failed because her staff expressed concerns about her authority to take such measures. But no one should delude themselves that the federal government will not continue to look for ways to suppress critical academics.

Anyone who does not submit to the governments pro-war policy and accept the authoritarian methods of the police state will have the funding tap turned off and be threatened with criminal charges. Most recently, thesmear campaignby the media and politicians against the president of Berlins Technical University, Geraldine Rauch, showed that even harmless likes for posts critical of Israel are not acceptable.

On campus, university management is systematically cracking down on student opposition to the genocide. An IYSSE event on the topic wasbanned for months. That is why we, together with other student groups, held apowerful rallyin front of the main building in December. Only a fortnight ago, two IYSSE events were authorisedalbeit under strict conditions. Only members of the university are allowed to attend, and all bags must be checked at the entrances, including for weapons including pocket knives, batons or objects that can be used as suchas if there had ever been any form of violence at IYSSE events.

These authoritarian restrictions are an act of political censorship and are aimed at intimidating and deterring participants. The IYSSE immediately protested against this in writing and called on the university administration to lift the restrictions. We explained: As a university group, we want to hold a public event in which all interested parties can participate. The requirement would represent a serious restriction of the university as a public place.

However, without addressing the content, the HU administration reiterated the requirement in another email and enforced it at the first IYSSE event. HU security staff carried out ID and bag checks at the entrance. Police officers were even posted in front of the entrance to the Audimax hall, where the event took place. The threatening backdrop and censorship are reminiscent of conditions in dictatorships. Students and lecturers are placed under general suspicion, their bags checked for weapons as if they were potential serious criminals.

People who are not members of a Berlin university were only able to follow the event because the IYSSE had organised a live broadcast in a public square. For more than 10 years, we have been organising events on political and historical topics at the HU and inviting all interested parties to join the discussionstudents and university employees as well as young people and workers.

The title of the last event, which was recorded on video, posed the question: What next in the fight against police violence and genocide? The speakers explained that the genocide in Gaza can only be stopped by an international movement of the working class, which is directed against all wars and their root cause, capitalism.

It is this perspectivean orientation and extension of the student protests to the working classthat the university management and all parties in the Berlin Senate (state assembly) and federal government fear the most. That is why they want to keep the working class off campus with censorship and police measures.

Other student groups at HU are also affected. The student group Decolonise Charit had already invited students to an event on May 31 entitled Being a doctor where there are no more hospitals at the North Campus, which also includes the Charit Berlin University Medical Centre. Two doctors reported on the dramatic effects of the Israeli war on healthcare in the Gaza Strip.

But here, too, a security guard stood at the entrance on behalf of the university management and prohibited external participants from entering. Even an entire school class with its teacher was turned away by security. According to the organisers, 270 people attended the event. According to the groups spokesperson, a new code for working groups at the Charit campus is also to be introduced, under which only working groups with a medical connection would be permitted.

These measures all have one goal: the truth about the war crimes in Gaza should not be heard, further resistance among students should be contained and a political discussion about the necessary conclusions from the protests should be prevented.

Against this backdrop, it is sheer mockery when the university management now declares in a letter dated June 11 that it wants to return to peaceful and respectful discourse. In the letter, university management calls for, among other things, a study of definitions of antisemitism as well as a critical examination of social science theories to which an affinity for antisemitic patterns is attributed. In plain language, this means that lecturers who deal critically with Zionism and the genocide of the Palestinians in their courses or writing are to be defamed as antisemites and subjected to attacks.

In its letter, the university management uses clichs such as an in-depth academic debate on the Middle East and multi-perspective analyses. However, its authoritarian approach to opponents of the war and dissenting opinions on the Gaza genocide proves that it wants to bring the HU ideologically into line with the government and enforce full support for Israel and its war policy in the Gaza Strip.

While anyone who speaks out against the Israeli genocide is defamed as an antisemite, right-wing extremist professors such as Jrg Baberowski have been politically and financially supported for years. The HU history professor not only trivialises the Holocaust, but also legitimises authoritarian methods of rule.

In 2018, he wanted to set up a radicalright-wing think tank for dictatorship researchat the HU to investigate dictatorships as alternative [social] orders. Only the protests of the IYSSE and other students were able to stop the establishment of this dictatorship centre. Despite this, Baberowski has received plenty of research funding and political backing from the Ministry of Education. His ideas of an authoritarian state are now being put into practice.

In February 2020, Baberowski even tore down IYSSE election posters with his own hands and hit one of our StuPa representatives when he caught him doing so. University management then fully backed Baberowski and did not even decide on a complaint to the supervisory board. This effectively gave right-wing forces on campus a free pass to tear down IYSSE posters and attack its members. Last year, Ukrainian nationalistssabotagedour StuPa election campaign with the full backing of the university.

This year, the IYSSEs election campaign is being attacked and censored again. Our posters were systematically and extensively torn down and destroyed by political opponents and university employees. Members of the IYSSE have documented this in the last few days and found several perpetrators tearing down the posters. The IYSSE called on the HU management in writing to condemn these anti-democratic interventions in the election campaign and to take measures to stop them. However, the university administration remains silent and thus backs the attacks.

The sabotage and censorship on campus is not an expression of the strength of the university administration and the federal government, but of their fear of growing resistance among students and workers. The European elections have once again shown how much hatred there is in the population for the parties of the coalition government and their policies of escalating war and social cuts.

The IYSSE are running in the StuPa elections on June 18-19 to fight among students for a socialist and international movement against war and capitalism. We will not allow socialists and opponents of war to be suppressed and will not be intimidated by the measures taken by the university.

We therefore call on all students: Protest against the authoritarian police regime at Humboldt University! Defend freedom of expression, freedom of assembly and academic freedom! Come to ournext eventin large numbers and elect the IYSSE (List 2) to the student parliament!

Join the fight for socialism

Link:
Stop the censorship of war opponents and attacks on freedom of expression at Humboldt University Berlin! - WSWS

Kelly is a former librarian and a long-time blogger at STACKED. She's the editor/author of (DON'T) CALL ME CRAZY: 33 VOICES START THE CONVERSATION ABOUT MENTAL HEALTH and the editor/author of HERE WE ARE: FEMINISM FOR THE REAL WORLD. Her next book, BODY TALK, will publish in Fall 2020. Follow her on Instagram @heykellyjensen.

View All posts by Kelly Jensen

Several states nationwide have floated legislation to curtail book bans this year. Some of those bills, like the one proposed in Utah, were not only voted down but were superseded with bills that actually further fuel book bans. Other anti-book ban bills, however, made their way successfully through to law.

Lets take a look at the states that have addressed the right to read and access materials at the library by law. This is as comprehensive as possible, with the acknowledgment that other bills may be pending as of writing or maybe in the works for the next legislative session. It does not include bills that address other library-related issues.

Passed in 2023, the first-in-the-nation anti-book ban bill in Illinois ties funding to intellectual freedom policies in public and public school libraries. Basically, if a library wants access to a pot of state money for their institution, they need to have in their collection policies the American Library Associations Library Bill of Rights and/or a comparable statement upholding the rights of everyone to access materials in the collection. Books and other items in the library cannot be removed for partisan or discriminatory reasons.

This is a great first step, though certainly, it hasnt ended book bans in Illinois over the course of its first year as a law because it is fairly limited in scope (it was easy for a school board to ban an entire book reading program, for example). It also does not apply to prison libraries. But the signal this bill sends to libraries that the state is paying attention cannot be downplayed.

Literary Activism Newsletter

News you can use plus tips and tools for the fight against censorship and other bookish activism!

Thank you for signing up! Keep an eye on your inbox.

Also passed in 2023, the California anti-book ban bill applies to school boards specifically. They are unable to censor or ban books, curricula, textbooks, or other learning materials from the districts they oversee. The bill does not apply to public libraries or prison libraries. It also has not stopped school boards from censorship since implementation (not to mention that its public libraries bearing the brunt of censorship right now), but, like the bill in Illinois, it is at least an acknowledgment of an ongoing reality, even in a blue state like California.

There is a bill still alive in the state (AB 1825) crossed over from the Assembly to the Senate in the past weeks that would ban book bans more akin to how Illinois has.

Passed in early June 2024, Colorado has implemented new laws requiring every public library to have a collection policy and, if they allow for books to be challenged, requiring policies governing the process. One thing this particular bill does that is noteworthy is it requires keeping track of the outcomes of every official book challenge in public libraries. It also makes the names of those seeking to remove books public. Both of these add a crucial layer of transparency to the process. The bill does not, however, codify that books cannot be removed for discriminatory reasons (though that was in the original draft).

Minnesotas governor signed off on Senate File 3567 as part of a robust education bill. The portion related to libraries relates to both public and public school libraries, as well as public colleges and universities. All of these institutions are now required to have collection policies, as well as guidelines for the selection and reconsideration of material. This is similar to that passed in Colorado, though Minnesotas bill makes it clear books cannot be removed on the basis of viewpoint or opinion alone.

Also passed this year is Marylands Freedom to Read Act. In both public libraries and school libraries, the bill protects access to books and other library items by stating they cannot be removed or prohibited from collections because of partisan or doctrinal disapproval. Collections seek to serve the research and recreational needs of all, and materials cannot be excluded based on the origin, background, or views of their creator. Both school and public libraries would need to have collection development policies in place, and if a book were to be challenged, the title would remain on shelves and available for use through the reconsideration process.

One of the more robust bills passed in 2024 is Vermonts Protecting Libraries and the Freedom to Read Bill. Among the provisions are requiring libraries to have policies that align with the First Amendment and anti-discrimination laws. Legal protections for libraries and library workers throughout the state have been strengthened as well as more robust opportunities for education around libraries and their role in community and civic life would be created for library workers and trustees.

What makes Vermonts legislation stand out, aside from its clear commitment to upholding and championing libraries, is that its emergence came following a report put together by library workers to give the legislature a real picture of the current state of the states institutions. You can read the full working group report here.

An anti-book banning measure for public schools passed in the state of Washington. HB 2331 is similar to the California bill in that it bars school boards from banning books, curriculum, textbooks, and other materials from use for discriminatory reasons. By the 2025-2026 school year, boards need to have in place policies related to supplemental materials (i.e., library and classroom materials) and how those are reviewed and evaluated were they to be challenged.

These wins matter. Even when the bills initially presented look significantly different by the end, like the one in Colorado, they send an important message. Use these wins to continue fueling your own anti-censorship work and remember, the most important things you can do to fight book bans in 2024 is to vote, show up to board meetings, and get into the ears of those who represent you.

Its worth noting here that several anti-book ban bills are still on the docket in other states. New Jerseys Freedom to Read Act moved forward in the legislature just last week, taking it one step closer to passage. Massachusetts, one of the first states to introduce anti-book ban legislation in 2024, pushed its hearings on the measures to June. The concurrent House and Senate proposals are currently in committee.

You can dive into the states that have attempted successfully or not to criminalize librarians this year, as well as the states which have made it or tried to make it against the law for library workers to join or engage with the American Library Association.

Read more:
States That Have Banned Book Bans: Book Censorship News, June 14, 2024 - Book Riot

Librarian Sabrina Jesram arranges a display of books during Banned Books Week at a public library branch in New York City on Sept. 23, 2022. Ted Shaffrey/AP hide caption

"Book ban" is one of those headline-ready terms often used by the news media, including NPR, for stories about the surge in book challenges across the U.S.

The American Library Association launched its annual Banned Books Week in 1982. There are banned book clubs. States have introduced or passed laws thatve been called bans on book bans. Meanwhile, many people fighting to get books removed from school libraries are not fans of the term book ban.

The practice of censoring books has been around for centuries. But what does it actually mean to ban a book today? The answer depends on who you ask. Here are a handful of definitions from people entrenched in the issue:

Kasey Meehan, program director of PEN Americas Freedom to Read (speaking at a video press conference in April) : We define a book ban as any action taken against a book based on its content that leads to a previously accessible book being completely removed from availability for students or where access to a book is restricted or diminished. PEN is perhaps a bit unique, and that's in contrast to ALA [American Library Association] and some others, in that we do include books that have been removed while awaiting review as a ban. We include that because we know books are undergoing review. As long as they are removed from access for students, those books can be removed for weeks, months, upwards of a year as we've seen in some cases.

NOTE: The American Enterprise Institute took exception to PEN Americas definition. A study AEI conducted for the Educational Freedom Institute looked at PEN Americas 2021-2022 index of banned books and found that 74 percent of the books listed as banned are listed as available in the same districts from which PEN America says those books were banned.

Emily Drabinski, president of the American Library Association: A book ban is the removal of a title from a library because someone considers it harmful or dangerous. A challenge is when someone raises an objection to a library material or a program or a service. Reconsideration is the formal process libraries go through to determine whether a book meets the library's selection criteria. We reserve book ban for a book that meets that criteria when it has been removed from a collection entirely. You often do find that books, they are challenged and then they undergo a review process and sometimes they end up being pulled and banned and other times they end up back on the shelves. I think sometimes our policymakers and many of the people who are active in the pro-censorship movement, they don't fully appreciate or understand the fact that many Americans, lots of them, don't have access to books in any other way except through their library, through their school or public or academic library.

Joe Tier, a self-described concerned grandparent and parent living in Eldersburg, Maryland: I think [the term book ban is] designed to be inflammatory and to obfuscate the constructive dialogue that should occur about age appropriate content. It can be a dog whistle that's used to incite anger against those who are opposed to limiting sexually explicit content in public school libraries. You really cannot ban anything, you know, material-wise these days because you have the Internet and you have PDFs. And so the term book ban is almost obsolete.

Mustafa Akyol, senior fellow at the Cato Institute and author of Islam Without Extremes (banned in Malaysia in 2017): "When [a book] is banned, it's not available, so it's not legal to sell it. That's what a book ban means. I was arrested at the Kuala Lumpur International Airport After 18 hours of detainment by the Malaysian religion police, I was let go Bookstores couldn't sell [Islam Without Extremes] in Malaysia. My book was not available There might be some regimes who are even going after people for possessing a copy of the book I don't think there are literal book bans in the United States. When a book is banned, literally the authority says this book is not legal.Sometimes people use hyperbolic language to express their thoughts about a particular problem, and that might be a problem. And that divisive rhetoric then makes everything worse. So you cannot reasonably agree on some reasonable common ground and everybody becomes more and more strident and angry against each other. That in itself becomes a major problem for a democracy rather than just different opinion that people have on certain things.

Mona Kerby, Masters degree in School Librarianship coordinator at McDaniel College in Westminster, Maryland: To me, banned is the book's not on the shelf. But I could certainly see the different flavors of that word, and thats why a discussion about ideas is always so enriching. The few times I had some question about materials, those moments turned into wonderful opportunities between me and the parent just to discuss. And we both learned. So respecting one another's opinion and listening to another's opinion is not a bad skill to have.

This story was edited for radio and digital byMeghan Collins Sullivan.

Originally posted here:
What's the definition of book ban? Librarians, authors, others weigh in - NPR

As Prime Minister Narendra Modi readies for his third term, he formally took the oath of office on Sunday, casting a shadow over the nations landscape of free speech and press freedom. With each successive term, Modis administration has faced criticism for tightening control over the media and curbing dissenting voices, with instances of journalists and activists facing harassment, intimidation, and even legal action for criticisng the government or expressing views contrary to the official narrative.

Indias extensive six-week election period concluded with a tally of 640 million votes on 4 June. In the 2024 Lok Sabha elections, the BJP-led NDA (National Democratic Alliance) secured an outright majority by winning 292 seats out of the 543 seats, surpassing the 272 seats required for a clear majority in Indias lower house of Parliament.

Meer Faisal, a 23-year-old journalist and the founder of The Observer Post, an online news portal based in Delhi, holds little optimism regarding Modis government when it comes to censorship and freedom of expression in India. He has faced significant censorship in the past during Modis tenure for his coverage on atrocities against Muslims in India. In October last year, his Twitter account faced restrictions in India due to his reporting.

As a journalist, especially being a Muslim, it invites more censorship and trouble. The Modi government aims to silence every voice that speaks against them. They want to build a narrative in the country and label everyone who criticises government policies as anti-national, said Faisal.

Faisal is among many in India who express fear concerning Modis third term, citing concerns beyond censorship to include threats to freedom of speech.

Since August 2019, the Modi government has also barred many Kashmiri journalists from travelling abroad, offering no explanation for restricting their fundamental rights.

In Modis third term, I fear that there will be more harsh policies against journalists and more tactics will be employed to intimidate us. This will directly impact our reporting abilities and help authorities in curbing the voice of people, said Faisal.

In the 2024 edition of the Press Freedom Index published by Reporters Without Borders, India is ranked 159th out of the 180 nations considered. With violenceagainst journalists, highly concentratedmedia ownership, andpoliticalalignment,press freedom is in crisis in the worldslargest democracy, ruled since 2014 by Prime Minister Narendra Modi,leaderof the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) andembodimentof the Hindu nationalist right, RSF stated while releasing the data.

Asif Mujtaba, 34, an advocate for peoples rights and director of the Miles2smile Foundationwhich works with survivors of mob lynching, communal violence, and selective communal demolitionbelieves that the space for dissent has significantly decreased since Modi came to power, and public participation in protests has also diminished.

Its become a tough task for social and political activists, regardless of any religion, to work for peoples rights under Modis regime. The government can use any stringent law to frame you and silence your voice, saidMujtaba.

According to Mujtaba, many people in India are apprehensive about openly criticising Modi because they are aware of the potential repercussions. A significant number of individuals who were once vocal against the regime have now become quiet..

Modis administration is aware of the escalating dissent and the potential for increased protests against their policies in the third term. The growing public dissent will force Modi to resort to heavy-handed tactics to silence the people, said Mujtaba.

In the first four months of 2024, India has experienced at least 134 instances of free speech violation, impacting journalists, academics, YouTubers, and students, according to a report published by the Free Speech Collective in early May. The organisation tracks and categorises free speech violations and offers support to those affected.

Niranjan K S, 22, a fourth-year law student at Jamia Millia Islamia, Delhi, and a member of the All India Revolutionary Students Organisation (AIRSO), argues that the suppression of dissent is driven by the corporate-Hindutva fascist nexus, which aims to transform the country into a fascist dictatorship. As a result, free speech will be stifled, and only those who support the ruling forces will retain their right to free expression.

The surge in the enforcement of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA) and the uptick in political detentions, particularly aimed at students and activists like Sharjeel Imam and Umar Khalid, who were involved in the anti-CAA protests of 2019, demonstrate a systematic use of these draconian laws to quash all forms of dissent, said Niranjan.

During the protests, students played an active role in amplifying the voices of the oppressed within the country. However, the BJP regime labeled these students as anti-national and terrorists, attempting to delegitimise their activism and dissent.

Niranjan emphasised that secularism and communal harmony are already under significant threat due to the Hindutva ideology of the current regime, which could further hinder free speech. In this third term of the Modi government, the non-state elements of fascism will be more utilised to advance their offensive than the state elements, said Niranjan.

Index on Censorship sought a response from a BJP spokesperson regarding censorship as Modi embarks on his historic third term. Answer came there none.

More:
Fears of censorship grow as Modi begins third term - Index on Censorship