Image

“Debate Is Hate” De Moraes Lifts Brazil’s X Ban

"He’s only now agreeing to lift the blockade after the elections are over."

Justice Alexandre De Moraes announced the reversal of Brazil’s X ban on Tuesday.

In a decision published online, De Moraes ramped up his war on what he called anti-democratic “digital militias.”

Presumably talking about Elon Musk, De Moraes’ initial ban blamed “extremist digital populists” using social media networks to spread “hate speech, and anti-democratic messages.”

The 8-page announcement restated justifications for his August ban on the social media platform.

Notably, De Moraes’ original decision repeated globalist leftwing propaganda, labelling dissent as “disinformation.”

“Use of disinformation,” the 8-page release form declared, “erodes the pillars of Democracy, and the rule of the law.”

The government, his ruling declared, demands “absolute respect,” and compliance with “the decisions of the Government judiciary.”

In other words, total compliance with what De Moraes demands and/or decides.

Point 1 of 8 made free speech the equivalent of violence, with De Moraes warning, that “freedom of expression should not be confused with freedom of aggression.”

Without defining the terms, De Moraes called bans on “hate speech and incitement necessary,” and then declared censorship constitutional.

Point 2 reasserted De Moraes’ dominion over “private entities” doing business in Brazil.

Stating the obvious, he reasoned that they should “respect the national legal system, and comply with direct commands issued by the Brazilian judiciary [i.e.: De Moraes].”

Points 3 and 4 discussed in-country representation, where the entity is within reach of the government; and physically accessible, making X more accountable to Brazilian law, and the judiciary’s direct commands.

Points 5 through 6, discussed civil liability, and X Brazil’s compliance with the direct commands of the judiciary.

Point 7 scolded X for “ostentatious and aggressive disrespect” towards the “judicial orders of the Brazilian judiciary.”

Subpoints here included Elon Musk pulling staff out of the country, and out of De Moraes’ reach.

This was accompanied by X having no legal representatives, and Musk not paying De Moraes’ fines.

Point 7 also gave special mention to “numerous offensive posts reiterating contempt” for the Brazilian “justice.”

Point 8 of 9 accused X of deliberate “non-compliance in order to establish an environment of total impunity and lawlessness on Brazilian social networks.”

Charging X with election interference, De Moraes added, X Brazil was aiding and abetting extremists “during the 2024 municipal elections.”

To this, he said, “X maintained and expanded itself as an instrument for digital militias, disseminating Nazi, racist, fascist, hateful, and anti-democratic speeches.”

Point 9 referred to the fiat banning X until a legal representative was appointed, and Musk paid what was effectively a free speech tax, in the form of a fine.

X challenged the ban, stating the company had complied with Brazilian law and De Moraes’ demands.

In September, X acquired a legal proxy.

On October 4, X then paid USD $5.2 million (28 million Brazilian Real) in fines.

Ending X’s ban, Brazil’s Attorney General said, X blocking profiles for “spreading false information,” paying fines, and appointing a proxy, meant “there was no reason to prevent the company from resuming its activities.

“The initial reasons for the ban no longer stand.”

Consequently, De Moraes “decreed the termination of X’s suspension,” then ordered telecommunications companies to comply.

Alliance Defending Freedom International (ADF) said they won’t be backing down.

De Moraes still needs to be held to account for banning X.

“He’s only now agreeing to lift the blockade after the elections are over.

“Censorship has been a persistent and escalating problem in Brazil since 2019,” ADF’s Director for Latin America explained.

“We will continue to make the case that the actions of De Moraes and the greater climate of censorship are unacceptable, until the day that freedom of expression and information are once again secured for all in Brazil.”

Dubbed dictator De Moraes, the justice stopped short of declaring victory in what appears to have been a convenient political exercise.

He admits that the 39-day war on Musk was motivated by local elections.

Hinting at the X ban being about “saving democracy,” De Moraes effectively said he killed free speech, in order to save democracy.

Given the context, the decision’s content suggests a completely different story: De Moraes killed freedom of speech in order to save Brazil’s Leftwing bureaucracy.

Special Request:

For nearly eight years, we've highlighted issues ignored by mainstream media and resisted globalist ideologies eroding Western civilization. We've done this joyfully, without paywalls, despite personal costs to our team. Your support has kept us going, but operating costs exceed donations, forcing us to use ads. We’d love to ditch them, so we’re asking for your help. If you value our work, please consider supporting us via Stripe or PayPal. Every bit helps us keep fighting for our kids’ future. Thank you!

What's New?

Use the blue arrows at the bottom to scroll through the latest.
Deeming Backs Smith After Pronoun Police Penalty: Refusing to Affirm a Lie Isn’t Dishonesty – It’s Courage!

Deeming Backs Smith After Pronoun Police Penalty: Refusing to Affirm a Lie Isn’t Dishonesty – It’s Courage!

“By supporting Kirralie, you’re really supporting every single Australian who wants to speak up in the future. This is especially so for women, because when one woman is punished for this, thousands of women are made silent.”
By
by Rod LampardDec 17, 2025
We Don’t Need Antisemitism Laws—We Need Anti-Australia Laws

We Don’t Need Antisemitism Laws—We Need Anti-Australia Laws

Australia does not need race-based antisemitism laws; it needs a pro-Australian legal framework that applies equally to all and punishes harmful conduct regardless of who commits it or who the victim is.
By
by Ben DavisDec 17, 2025
From “You Do You” to Leadership Coups: The Deadly Fruit of Post-Modernists in the Pulpit

From “You Do You” to Leadership Coups: The Deadly Fruit of Post-Modernists in the Pulpit

“Anyone who says that there are no truths, or that all truth is ‘merely relative,’ is asking you not to believe him. So don’t!”
By
by Rod LampardDec 16, 2025
Matt Walsh Slams Australian Government After Bondi Shooting

Matt Walsh Slams Australian Government After Bondi Shooting

"Rules are not enough. You also need to ensure that your country is full of people who are willing to follow those rules. And in that very important respect, Australia has clearly failed."
By
by Staff WriterDec 16, 2025
A Government Too Afraid to Name the Problem Can Never Fix It

A Government Too Afraid to Name the Problem Can Never Fix It

"Governments have become not only incapable but increasingly unwilling to acknowledge the simple and self-evident truth that some ideas are bad, and bad ideas inevitably produce bad behaviour."
By
by Ben DavisDec 16, 2025
16-Year-Old Explains Why the Social Media Ban Won’t Work

16-Year-Old Explains Why the Social Media Ban Won’t Work

"There are three very prominent concerns when it comes to how this law will actually work and the repercussions it could have."
By
by Selah CampisiDec 15, 2025
Bondi Massacre: A Wake-Up Call for Australia

Bondi Massacre: A Wake-Up Call for Australia

"Without honest discourse, decisive policy, and recognition that not all cultures can coexist harmoniously, such attacks are likely to recur—just look at Europe today."
By
by Staff WriterDec 15, 2025
White Guilt is Dead

White Guilt is Dead

"For decades, White guilt has been used as a tool of social control—silencing dissent, suppressing legitimate demographic concerns, and guilt-tripping Westerners into accepting policies that no other civilisation on earth would tolerate."
By
by Staff WriterDec 13, 2025

Image

Support

If you value our work and would like to support us, you can do so by visiting our support page. Can’t find what you’re looking for? Visit our search page.

Copyright © 2025, Caldron Pool

Permissions

Everything published at Caldron Pool is protected by copyright and cannot be used and/or duplicated without prior written permission. Links and excerpts with full attribution are permitted. Published articles represent the opinions of the author and may not reflect the views of all contributors at Caldron Pool.

Caldron Pool does not condone the use of violence, threats, or intimidation for political or religious purposes. We strongly advocate for peaceful, respectful, and free communication and open debate without fear of reprisal or punishment.