Kamala Harris has consistently been portrayed as a power-centric individual, particularly during her tenure as a prosecutor. In a recently resurfaced clip from May 2019, she detailed her vision of utilizing the Department of Justice (DOJ) to combat disinformation and hate speech on social media platforms. At the NAACP ‘Fight for Freedom Fund’ dinner in Detroit, Harris asserted the need to “put the Department of Justice of the United States back in the business of justice,” with a focus on doubling the civil rights division and directing law enforcement to counter extremism. This rhetoric sparked concerns among critics, who interpreted her comments as an indication of an authoritarian approach to governance, contrasting sharply with criticisms levied against former President Donald Trump.
Harris’s statements also drew attention to the accountability of social media platforms for the content shared within their networks. She emphasized the responsibility these companies bear in combating hate speech, stating, “If you profit off of hate, if you act as a megaphone for misinformation or cyber warfare… we are going to hold you accountable.” Critics of her stance worry that this could lead to overreach by the government and censorship of free speech, raising alarms about the implications for democratic principles and individual rights. This perspective suggests that Harris’s approach may misuse the DOJ’s resources to enforce a narrative that aligns with her political beliefs rather than uphold impartiality.
The actions taken by the Biden-Harris administration in the realm of social media during their term further invigorate these criticisms. Instances such as the prosecution of an individual for creating a meme about voting, while ignoring similar behavior from political allies, raises questions about selective enforcement and political bias. The administration’s alleged collaboration with Twitter to censor content related to COVID-19 misinformation and the Hunter Biden laptop story underscores concerns over government influence on social media practices. These actions suggest a troubling precedent where the government plays an active role in moderating content that deviates from its narrative.
Moreover, various calls from within the Biden-Harris administration for social media platforms to regulate misinformation highlight a trend toward increased oversight of online discourse. The Surgeon General’s demands to censor COVID-19 misinformation and the insistence on regulating discussions about gender-affirming care for minors echo the broader theme of leveraging governmental power to control narratives. Such measures provoke fears about the potential for suppressing dissenting opinions and stifling essential public discourse necessary for a functional democracy.
The chilling implications of categorizing misinformation as ‘election crimes’ further contribute to the anxiety surrounding this administration’s approach to speech and expression. A leaked FBI pamphlet identifying misinformation and disinformation in this context raises profound questions about the balance between legitimate discourse and governmental oversight. Critics argue that such a framework may empower government entities to monitor and punish individuals or organizations based solely on the subjective interpretation of misinformation, leading to an environment where free speech is undermined.
In light of these developments, the narrative surrounding Kamala Harris’s ambitions and the Biden-Harris administration’s policies calls into question the limits of governmental authority in regulating speech. As debates continue about the balance between safeguarding democracy and protecting individual freedoms, the fear of authoritarianism, especially regarding the control of information and public discourse, becomes increasingly pronounced. The complexities of this issue compel ongoing scrutiny and vigilance to ensure that democracy is not compromised in the name of fighting hate or misinformation, echoing sentiments of those who worry that such measures could reverse the foundational principles of free expression and accountability that underpin American society.