A message from American television host Jimmy Kimmel was broadcast on British television, presenting a warning about what he described as the deteriorating state of free speech in the United States.

Framing his remarks in dramatic terms, Kimmel told viewers that, “from a fascism perspective, this has been a really great year,” adding that “tyranny is booming over here”.

In his statement, Kimmel claimed that the American government had made a threat against him and the company he works for, leading to his show temporarily going off the air.

He went on to say that the programme later returned, stronger than before.

“We won, the president lost, and now I’m back on the air every night,” he said, presenting this sequence of events as evidence of attempted suppression.

The situation he described, however, stands in stark contrast to the historical realities of authoritarian systems.

Kimmel remains employed by a major broadcasting network, continues to air his programme regularly, and now has his criticisms amplified through international broadcasts.

His claims of victimhood are being shared openly, across borders, and without apparent restriction.

In genuinely authoritarian regimes, critics do not return to prime-time television, secure lucrative contracts, or address global audiences.

They tend to vanish quietly, without platforms or protection.

The contradiction between Kimmel’s continued prominence and his portrayal of a silencing tyranny raises fundamental questions about the meaning of oppression, and about how the term is used in modern political rhetoric.