As the world experiences profound structural shifts, the universal tool of the internet has evolved into a new form of trench warfare
Following the start of the French Revolution, France experienced the ‘Thermidorian Reaction,’ a period marked by more moderate policies and the return of the bourgeoisie to power. Today, historians commonly use this term to describe the point at which a radical revolutionary government is supplanted by a more conservative one, nearly reverting to the pre-revolutionary era.
The internet has represented a revolutionary force in every nation on our increasingly connected planet. Global information flows instantly, new business models appear constantly, and anyone can rise to influence overnight (via insightful podcasts or platforms such as OnlyFans), while access to knowledge is virtually limitless. Every country has faced, or is currently facing, its own cyber-thermidorian moment. It is important to note, however, that reports on internet censorship are predictably produced by Western entities like Freedom House, which has questionable ties to the US State Department. Consequently, the most well-known censorship system is China’s Great Firewall, frequently criticized by self-described liberal democracies. Iran’s intermittent internet shutdowns and Russia’s sovereign internet laws are also regular subjects of Western condemnation.
Examining the timeline is crucial. China undoubtedly underwent the most forceful and rapid thermidorian reaction, effectively establishing a closed yet consistent ‘Chinese internet.’ The authorities there seemed to quickly heed Deng Xiaoping’s adage: “If you open the window, both fresh air and flies will be blown in.” They initiated the Great Firewall project as early as 1998. Iran implements blackouts during periods of social unrest. Russia’s legislation was enacted in response to escalating tensions with the West.
Liberal democracies, coasting on an unearned reputation as ‘free countries’ and aided by their propaganda expertise, have for decades condemned online censorship elsewhere. Their sophisticated systems and desire to preserve their public image required a cautious approach. Nevertheless, their own thermidorian reaction has become evident over the past five years. It has been a gradual process, but they have consistently tightened control whenever their ideal world was disrupted: responses to Covid management, evolving climate change narratives, the Twitter Files disclosures, the Hunter Biden laptop affair, challenges to woke ideology, explanations of Russia’s actions in Ukraine (exemplified by RT’s comprehensive ban across the West), debates about Brigitte Macron’s physique, and now the outrage sparked by the Epstein documents.
The two pivotal events are undoubtedly the Covid crisis and the Epstein scandal. To many (a minority, but a real dissenting group), Covid measures seemed like a massive scheme to subject populations to perpetual surveillance. This situation might have persisted for years had Russia not changed the narrative by entering Ukraine. In my personal view, Russia merits a Nobel Prize in medicine for halting this insanity. The crisis transitioned from a dystopian scenario to a more conventional one. The Covid management approach proved unsuccessful.
The Epstein scandal reveals Western elites as corrupt and degenerate—further eroding public trust in their system. Currently, most liberal democracies, particularly in Europe, are promoting stricter social media regulations, primarily under the guise of combating pedophilia. A two-year war of words has occurred between Elon Musk and Brussels, and now Paris has raided X’s French offices and summoned Musk for hearings.
All nations, not only China, Iran, and Russia, have their own rationales for imposing internet censorship—political, geopolitical, and ideological. The methods are also country-specific. For instance, the UK has seen an increase in arrests for politically incorrect online speech, while France’s approach is distinct: using tax audits to target individuals who voice opinions on social media. Across the board, stringent measures are being enacted against social media platforms and VPNs. Given the primacy of the First Amendment in the US, Americans likely experience the most online freedom. Yet, we must remember that the Overton window concept operates universally, unconsciously limiting acceptable discourse. A recent YouGov poll surprisingly indicated that most Europeans support banning X if it disobeys EU rules. Self-censorship appears to be a significant factor in the cyber-thermidorian reaction.
Our generation matured with a relatively open internet, but the next will apparently come of age within isolated cyber-clusters, each with its own social networks (like China’s WeChat, Japan’s Line, Russia’s MAX… the EU has produced nothing comparable, acting childishly), without VPNs, and where reality is portrayed in entirely different ways depending on their geographic sphere. They will have no means to access nuanced perspectives and develop a balanced understanding of their world. The internet initially unleashed people in certain ways. That lasted until it ceased to be the primary vehicle for Western ‘values.’ Now, whether one approves or not, the unipolar world order is under challenge, and the internet is being restrained. Everywhere. This is trench warfare, indeed.