Commentary

Don’t Come to Him With Free Speech. He Already Has a Word for That.

Posted on by Bill McCarthy

German Chancellor Friedrich Merz told a room of science kids in Berlin on Tuesday not to bring him that phrase. He said it in English, like a punchline. “Please, no one come to me with free speech. That has nothing to do with free speech anymore.” What he wants is names on the accounts. What he calls protection is the state standing between the citizen and “false information,” “personal degradation,” and “discrimination.” What he does not share is the “libertarian” idea he says leaks out of parts of America. A liberal society, in his telling, is one that can still sue a newspaper. The internet forgot the hygiene. He intends to remind it.

That is not a gaffe. That is the operating system.

What He Said, Without the Perfume

A student asked the obvious question: if everyone must post under a real name, what happens to whistleblowers and the people who dig? Merz did not answer the question. He answered the mood. Anonymous hate, bot sludge, scientists getting piled on. In the analog world of his youth, a paper that printed a lie could be dragged into court. Online, a fake handle does the damage and vanishes. Therefore: Klarnamenpflicht. Real names. Accountability. Protection.

Notice the list of things the citizen must be protected from. Not just threats. False information. Put-downs. Discrimination. Those are not burglary. Those are arguments. The chancellor of a country that already criminalizes insulting politicians, already fines platforms that leave up “unlawful” posts too long, already lives under a continental speech code, has decided the remaining problem is that you can still be nobody when you say the government is wrong.

He is polling in the cellar. One survey this week had satisfaction with his work at 10 percent and dissatisfaction at 88. The party that wants mass deportations just took 44 percent in an eastern state. His own brand is so toxic that three-quarters of that state’s voters said he hurt his ticket. So the diagnosis writes itself. Too much criticism. Too much “disinformation.” The remedy is not a better argument. The remedy is a smaller mouth.

Germany Is Not Discovering This. It Is Tightening It.

This is not 1791 with a wig. Berlin has been in the content business for years. Platforms already have to yank posts on a clock or pay. “Insult” is a crime when the target has a title. Calling the chancellor a liar has already produced a fine and a lecture from Washington. The next turn is simpler: no mask, no speech. If the account has a legal name, the prosecutor has an address. If the post is “false,” the ministry that defines false has a defendant.

He wrapped it in lab coats — protect the researchers — because nobody wants to vote for the man who says he is tired of being yelled at. The yell is the point. A government that is losing elections to people it has spent a decade calling illegitimate does not suddenly develop a passion for footnotes. It develops a passion for identity.

Can It Happen Here?

It already did, just without the honest sentence.

During COVID the American version did not need a chancellor to say “don’t bring me free speech.” It needed public-health letters, platform “trust and safety,” and a press that treated the wrong hypothesis as violence. Lab-leak talk was a conspiracy until it was a committee hearing. Doctors who wanted focused protection instead of shutdowns were dirty. A laptop was Russian until it was evidence. None of that required a statute titled Censorship Act. It required a consensus that some sentences were unsafe, and a machinery that could throttle them before a judge ever saw a brief.

The First Amendment is still the wall Germany does not have. Courts here still start from the idea that the government does not get a veto on “false information” about itself. That is why Merz has to sneer at the American idea by name. He knows where the infection comes from.

The infection travels anyway. Europe’s platform rules were written to apply to companies that also operate in Ohio. A real-name mandate in Berlin is a template, not a quarantine. The administrative state that leaned on speech during the pandemic did not retire. It learned which levers moved. A future majority that talks like Merz will not need to repeal the First Amendment. It will need a crisis, a definition of harm, and a partnership with the companies that already have the kill switch.

What “Likely” Means

A German-style insult law, passed as a bill and signed in the Rose Garden, is not the base case. A COVID-style squeeze — labeled safety, aimed at dissent, enforced by people who never run for anything — is the base case, because it already shipped. The tell is the vocabulary. When the people in charge start saying criticism is disinformation and anonymity is violence, they are not asking for better facts. They are asking for fewer critics.

Merz is a conservative by the local union card. He still wants the state to protect you from the sentence that hurts. If that sounds familiar, it is because you lived through a few years when the wrong sentence about a virus could cost you a job. The difference is he said it out loud to children who won a science fair. Our version smiled and called it following the science.

Don’t come to him with free speech. He told you what he thinks that is. The only question left on this side of the ocean is whether we treat his sentence as a foreign curiosity or as the instruction manual we already used once and will be asked to use again.

Help American Liberty PAC in our mission to elect conservatives and save our nation. Support – American Liberty PAC