Why label this 'rightward'? Plenty of left-leaning governments throughout history have used censorship.
What does that have to do with Modi? Modi's government has moved far to the right.
In modern times these seem to have high correspondences.
Opposition parties are often anti-censorship, pro free speech etc. Once they come into power this all changes and they drift towards authoritarianism.
Western, left-leaning governments have invented the term "hate speech" to justify this behaviour, right-leaning governments would often use "family values".
Restricting hate speech protects the politically vulnerable, the minority, the oppressed. It's not a restriction on hate speech toward the government.
Restricting 'anti-family' speech protects the status quo, those in power, the political majority and oppresses the vulnerable minority. For example, look at the discrimination against LGTBQ people now.
Who said that? It seems fabricated to me, but what do I know? Show us some evidence.
the action of preventing part or the whole of a book, film, work of art, document, or other kind of communication from being seen or made available to the public, because it is considered to be offensive or harmful, or because it contains information that someone wishes to keep secret, often for political reasons
https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/censorsh...
Banning the making of bombs is not censorship.
Here are the books "Improvised Munitions Black Book" and "U.S. Army Unconventional Warfare Devices: Boobytraps" from Amazon:
https://www.amazon.com/Improvised-Munitions-Black-Book-Unabr...
Originally created for soldiers in guerrilla warfare situations, this handbook demonstrates the techniques for constructing weapons that are highly effective in the most harrowing of circumstances. Straightforward and incredibly user-friendly, it provides insightful information and step-by-step instructions on how to assemble weapons and explosives from common and readily available materials. Over 600 illustrations complement elaborate explanations of how to improvise any number of munitions from easily accessible resources.
https://www.amazon.com/U-S-Unconventional-Warfare-Devices-Bo...
Some of the materials discussed in this special forces guide to boobytraps include:
- Disguise boobytraps in common items.
- Disguise boobytraps in structures such as window frames and stairways.
- Disguise boobytraps in outdoor areas, in bushes and underground.
- Learn the mechanics of the various types of firing devices, detonators, fuses, cords, adapters, blasting caps, and lighters.
Actually following instructions in these books may lead to felony charges in all 50 states. But writing or reading about them is perfectly legal. The same goes for reading and writing about making scheduled drugs, poisons, and other controlled items.
To steel man you, exporting said books to certain countries is technically illegal under the same law that makes this wikipedia page technically illegal to serve to Iranian IP addresses: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export_of_cryptography_from_th...
By that definition the US censors speech such as incitement to violence, fraud, slander, and intellectual property. No place has ever been uncensored.
Like everything in life, there's a matter of degree to it and a question of what is censored.
> most intellectual property law is probably unconstitutional
Exceptional claims require exceptional evidence.
I doubt all the Soviet Union and other authoritarian communist regimes censored for decades was hate speech.
Sure, at the moment the left seems to largely align with social liberalism, at least in the west. Maybe authoritarianism is generally more correlated with conservatism, and conservatism with right-wing politics. But left vs. right and authoritarian vs. liberal aren't really the same axis, and it would seem historically quite myopic to think left-wing views somehow confer immunity to abuse of power.