In today's Brazil, the question that should echo in every healthy democracy has been silenced by a robe: who watches the watchmen? In the name of combating disinformation, the TSE \u2014 with the support of the STF \u2014 has taken on the role of arbiter of truth. A role not provided for in the Constitution, but embraced with enthusiasm by the state apparatus that presents itself as the guardian of democracy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The problem is not in the fight against lies, but in the method: a court, composed of ministers appointed by governments, unilaterally decides what is fact and what is fake. If this doesn\u2019t sound dangerous, perhaps it\u2019s worth revisiting some chapters in history in which censorship was also justified as a protective measure. The Inquisition used the pretext of faith. Nazism, of order. Stalinism, of revolution. And all of these experiences had something in common: they began by silencing \u201cdangerous\u201d ideas. The name of the medicine is always pretty. The taste, not.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Read more:<\/mark><\/strong>\u00a0Democracy in Silence: The Return of Single-Minded Thought\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n The STF decision that validated the TSE's superpowers was based on the need to preserve the integrity of the electoral process. A noble justification, if it weren't for the detail that \u201cintegrity\u201d has become synonymous with narrative control. The TSE can now remove posts, shut down channels and even determine what can be said in campaigns \u2014 without the need for a traditional judicial process, without adversarial proceedings, and without a clear deadline for review.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In other words: a State that claims to combat lies with censorship, without allowing debate, assumes ownership of the truth. It is like naming itself the secular Pope of post-truth. The monopoly of information is the new indulgence of the republic.<\/p>\n\n\n\n During the 2022 elections, legitimate content was removed for alleged \u201cthreats to democracy.\u201d A video of a jurist criticizing Supreme Court decisions. An academic article questioning electronic voting machines. A satirical cartoon featuring Supreme Court justices. All considered dangerous.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Meanwhile, openly manipulated news stories against opposition candidates circulated freely. The ideological filter was evident. And this is not about defending one political side \u2014 it is about defending the right to criticize all sides.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When censorship is selective, the State does not combat error: it chooses which errors can be said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The centralization of truth in the hands of the State is an old temptation. Authoritarian regimes \u2014 left and right \u2014 have always appealed to the argument of order to justify silencing. \u201cFreedom of expression is not freedom of disinformation,\u201d they say. The uncomfortable detail is that the one who defines what disinformation is\u2026 is the State itself.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Truth does not need state protection; only lies need to be imposed by decree.<\/strong>. When an electoral court becomes an inquisitor of opinions, democracy becomes a simulation. And elections become an empty ceremony.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With this precedent set, the 2026 election risks being the most heavily monitored in recent history. There is already discussion about expanding the number of filters, the use of \u201cfact-checking agents\u201d subordinate to the TSE, and the punishment of candidates who \u201cspread doubts\u201d about the process. Now, having doubts is the right of every free citizen. An electoral system that cannot be questioned is a dogma, not a republican institution.<\/p>\n\n\n\n When doubt becomes a crime, dissent is criminalized. And where dissent is prohibited, democracy is nothing more than a fa\u00e7ade. Prior censorship will be just the harbinger of a regime in which official propaganda takes the place of debate, and forged unanimity stifles any plurality. What is being built is not electoral security \u2014 it is a State immune to criticism and impervious to civil society.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The real risk to democracy is not criticism of the system, but the system\u2019s shielding against criticism. The state\u2019s lie is always sold as redeeming truth. But when the state becomes the judge of language, the citizen becomes a subject.<\/p>\n\n\n\n \ud83d\udce9 Subscribe to Economic Radar<\/strong> to receive analyses like this directly to your email \u2014 short, incisive and with the rigor that the silenced press does not deliver.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Read also:<\/strong> A critical analysis of the advancement of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) as an arbiter of electoral truth, with the support of the Supreme Federal Court (STF). When the State controls discourse, democracy loses its name and the people lose their voice.<\/p>","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":822,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"googlesitekit_rrm_CAow55rbCw:productID":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[667],"tags":[685,668,674,683,682,684,670,686,446,672,678],"class_list":["post-820","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-serie-a-nova-censura-liberdade-em-risco","tag-685","tag-censura","tag-democracia","tag-desinformacao","tag-eleicoes","tag-justica-eleitoral","tag-liberdade-de-expressao","tag-monopolio-da-verdade","tag-poder-estatal","tag-stf","tag-tse"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/820","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=820"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/820\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":876,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/820\/revisions\/876"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/822"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=820"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=820"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/poderemercado.com.br\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=820"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}The court of electoral truth<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Concrete cases: selective censorship?<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Authoritarian logic disguised as virtue<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
The impact on 2026<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
Conclusion<\/h4>\n\n\n\n
STF validates superpower<\/a>s of the TSE and buries electoral freedom<\/a>
STF, TSE and <\/a>the blurred line between power and censorship<\/a>
Democracy in silence: the return of single-minded thinking<\/a><\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"