The irony of governing with a blocker
It seems that the government of Nepal discovered, in the most brutal way possible, that you cannot put doors in the digital field. Or, in this case, that trying to do so could end with 19 people dead and an unemployed minister. Quite a lesson in civility and peaceful conflict management, don’t you think?
It turns out that the Nepalese authorities’ brilliant strategy to “ensure that the platforms are properly managed” consisted of hitting the block button like crazy. Facebook, X, YouTube… Get out! Because, of course, what better way to show that you are a serious and responsible government than by silencing half the population? The measure, which was intended to be an example of regulation, quickly became the instruction manual for how to burn down a capital in record time.
When “responsibility” is applied with bullets
The protests did not wait. Tens of thousands of people, angry like nuns without mass, took to the streets of Kathmandu to surround the Parliament building. And the State’s response was as subtle as ever: police shooting. Because nothing says “we hear your concerns” like a hail of lead. At least 19 people paid with their lives for daring to believe they could complain. Home Minister Ramesh Lekhak, perhaps sensing that the atmosphere was getting too heated for his liking, decided it was the perfect time to resign. A masterstroke: first you order repression and then you wash your hands like Pontius Pilate on a busy day.
The bill being promoted by the government is, how to put it, a gem of censorship disguised as concern for “accountability.” Basically, it seeks for social networks to be registered and subject to state supervision. Or, in Christian: that the government has the key to turn off the tap of dissent when it suits it. Critics, those spoilsports, see it as a tool to punish opponents. Who would have thought?
Companies received repeated notices to register. Some, like the mother of all distractions, TikTok, and Viber, obediently obeyed and continue to operate. Others, such as Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp), Google (YouTube) and the eccentric Elon Musk with his X, opted for the ostrich tactic: hiding their heads and not responding to requests for comments. Maybe they were too busy monetizing our personal data to worry about the nitpicks of free speech in a Himalayan country.
The lifting of the ban, one day after the massacre, smells like a classic “oops, we passed three towns.” It’s the government equivalent of apologizing after burning down your neighbor’s house. Of course, they do not lack effectiveness: in one week they blocked the networks, provoked a revolt, killed almost twenty people and fired a minister. Someone should tell them that productivity is not measured by the number of crises generated per hour.
The real question is: will they learn anything from this nonsense? I doubt it. The temptation to control the uncontrollable is too sweet for authoritarian governments. Next time, maybe they’ll try blocking the air. Overall, you start somewhere.
Did you like this gem of state management?Share it on your social networks and help us spread these episodes of reality over satire. Explore more content related to the absurd relationship between power and technology in our current affairs section.
