Chat Control 2: Digitalizing the Panopticon

Europe’s assault on free speech has become widespread and far-reaching. In Germany, a journalist was fined and given a suspended prison sentence this spring for circulating a satirical image of the interior minister captioned “I hate free speech.”

A woman was fined for uploading photos of politicians with digitally added toothbrush mustaches (a mocking visual trope in German satire). In France, a woman was recently detained for raising her middle finger at the president. She was released after claiming she had merely pointed her finger skyward, not directly at him. In the UK, police have taken action against 11-year-olds displaying the English flag, while women face prosecution for car decals containing swear words.

Do you still feel inspired to share your views publicly?

Within the EU, nations like Denmark and Sweden aim to implement Chat Control 2 – a system enabling algorithmic mass surveillance of all users (under EU jurisdiction). Over 500 leading cryptographers and cybersecurity experts describe the proposal as technically unfeasible and a threat to democracy. That it subjects citizens to arbitrary interference in their private correspondence " should leave no room for doubt.

Sweden’s Former Prime Minister Carl Bildt argued in 2013 that surveillance technology does not restrict our rights because it operates so discreetly that citizens remain unaware. According to him, problems only arise when people realize they’re being watched – a controversial stance akin to saying: “You never complained when we monitored you while you slept.”

Chat Control 2, not yet law, mandates automated scanning of all messages. This collapses Bildt’s argument. Free speech under such a system means speaking freely only within a transparent box where every word is logged.

Bentham’s Panopticon prison design looms large here: the science of being observed alters behavior, even if the watchtower stands empty. A single parent might avoid criticizing housing policy for fear of reprisal. A medical student won’t Google “self-harm behaviors” despite suicidal thoughts, fearing future employment or mortgage denials. Past criticism of a politician could be weaponized against you.

For many, the safest conclusion will be silence.

The Soviet Union’s 1989 collapse blindsided contemporary experts and intelligence agencies. Citizens had begun systematically lying about their views in public. A grocery store manager dutifully displayed the slogan: “Workers of the world, unite!” in his shop window while clenching a fist of dissent in his pocket. When citizens eventually stopped feigning loyalty, the regime crumbled rapidly.

Every step toward a surveillance state is indeed a step away from functional democracy. If citizens fear speaking freely, policymaking eventually relies on guesses and lies. Democracy becomes theater. Yes – the more governments or corporations surveil us, the less they will know our true views.

The surveillance state will not only mute dissent - it will also sabotage the messy, subversive thinking that drives cultural, social and technological progress. What genius will we lose due to the chill of the watchtower?

Cover image: AI