Despite attempts from China – and Australia – to curb online activities, the internet remains a powerful force for change
Google has withdrawn from China, arguing that it is no longer willing to design its search engine to block information that the Chinese government does not wish its citizens to have. In liberal democracies around the world, this decision has generally been greeted with enthusiasm.
But in one of those liberal democracies, Australia, the government recently said that it would legislate to block access to some websites. The prohibited material includes child pornography, bestiality, incest, graphic "high-impact" images of violence, anything promoting or providing instruction on crime or violence, detailed descriptions of the use of proscribed drugs, and how-to information on suicide by websites supporting the right to die for the terminally or incurably ill. A readers' poll in the Sydney Morning Herald showed 96% opposed to those proposed measures, and only 2% in support. More readers voted in this poll than in any previous poll shown on the newspaper's website, and the result is the most one-sided.
The internet, like the steam engine, is a technological breakthrough that changed the world. Today, if you have an internet connection, you have at your fingertips an amount of information previously available only to those with access to the world's greatest libraries – indeed, in most respects what is available through the internet dwarfs those libraries, and it is incomparably easier to find what you need. Remarkably, this came about with no central planning, no governing body, and no overall control, other than a system for allocating the names of websites and their addresses.
That something so significant could spring up independently of governments and big business led many to believe that the internet can bring the world a new type of freedom. It is as if an inherently decentralised and individualist technology had realised an anarchist vision that would have seemed utterly utopian if dreamed up by Peter Kropotkin in the 19th century. That may be why so many people believe so strongly that the internet should be left completely unfettered.
Perhaps because Google has been all about making information more widely available, its collaboration with China's official internet censors has been seen as a deep betrayal. The hope of internet anarchists was that repressive governments would have only two options: accept the internet with its limitless possibilities of spreading information, or restrict internet access to the ruling elite and turn your back on the 21st century, as North Korea has done.
Reality is more complex. The Chinese government was never going to cave in to Google's demand that it abandon internet censorship. The authorities will no doubt find ways of replacing the services that Google provided – at some cost, and maybe with some loss of efficiency, but the internet will remain fettered in China.
Nevertheless, the more important point is that Google is no longer lending its imprimatur to political censorship. Predictably, some accuse Google of seeking to impose its own values on a foreign culture. Nonsense. Google is entitled to choose how and with whom it does business. One could just as easily assert that during the period in which Google filtered its results in China, China was imposing its values on Google. Google's withdrawal is a decision in accordance with its own values. In my view, those values are more defensible than the values that lead to political censorship – and who knows how many Chinese would endorse the value of open access to information, too, if they had the chance?
Even with censorship, the internet is a force for change. Last month, when the governor of China's Hubei province threatened a journalist and grabbed her recorder after she asked a question about a local scandal, journalists, lawyers, and academics used the internet to object. A web report critical of the governor's behaviour stayed up for 18 hours before censors ordered it taken down. By then, however, the news was already widely dispersed.
Likewise, in Cuba, Yoani Sánchez's blog Generation Y has broken barriers that conventional media could not. Although the Cuban government has blocked access to the website on which the blog is posted, it is available around the world in many languages, and distributed within Cuba on CDs and flash drives.
The new freedom of expression brought by the internet goes far beyond politics. People relate to each other in new ways, posing questions about how we should respond to people when all that we know about them is what we have learned through a medium that permits all kinds of anonymity and deception. We discover new things about what people want to do and how they want to connect to each other. Do you live in an isolated village and have unusual hobbies, special interests, or sexual preferences? You will find someone online with whom to share them. Can't get to a doctor? You can check your symptoms online – but can you be sure that the medical website you are using is reliable?
Technology can be used for good or for bad, and it is too soon to reach a verdict on the internet. (In the 18th century, who could have foreseen that the development of the steam engine would have an impact on earth's climate?) Even if it does not fulfil the anarchist dream of ending repressive government, we are still only beginning to grasp the extent of what it will do to the way we live.
*guardian.co.uk
Apr 4, 2010
Justice arrested in Venezuela
Oswaldo Álvarez Paz's arrest is evidence of Chávez's abuse of the legal system and the silencing of his critics
The arrest of Oswaldo Álvarez Paz, a former president of Venezuela's Chamber of Deputies, governor of the Venezuelan state of Zulia, and presidential candidate, should concern the entire world because it demonstrates just how far President Hugo Chávez's regime is willing to stray from democratic norms. Standing silent as democracy atrophies in Venezuela is now not only immoral, but is becoming increasingly dangerous for all of Venezuela's people.
Álvarez Paz has a worldwide reputation for being an honourable man devoted to democratic principles. He has bravely sought to alert the world to the persecution that opponents of Chávez and his regime constantly suffer, as well as to the decline of democracy in his country over the decade of Chávez's rule. Indeed, his arrest on 22 March is compelling evidence of the truth of his testimony about the regime's nature, and of the danger that it poses to Venezuelans, whose freedoms apparently are being systematically stripped, and to Latin American more broadly, owing to Chávez's example to other would-be autocrats.
The seeming trigger for Álvarez Paz's arrest appears to have been his statements on Aló Ciudadano (Hello Citizen), a talk show broadcast by the private TV Channel Globovisión. Álvarez Paz commented on a resolution passed by the National Court of Spain (Audiencia Nacional de España) about alleged relations between the Venezuelan government, the Colombian guerilla group Farc, and the Spanish terrorist group Eta. Álvarez Paz rightly called for these allegations to be examined.
But, after simply calling for the law to be enforced and criminal activity investigated, Álvarez Paz was arrested on charges of conspiracy, spreading false information, and incitement of hatred. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison.
The arrest is important evidence of the promiscuous abuse of the legal system by Chávez and his functionaries in order to persecute, intimidate, and silence those who criticise his government. It also corroborates reports published by international organisations and institutions such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House about the increasing deterioration of political liberties in Venezuela.
Under Chávez's rule, a radical form of state-sanctioned lawlessness has taken hold in the country. You could say that Venezuela now exists as a "lawless legality", a political system within which officials deny that in making or interpreting laws they are bound in any way by the spirit of justice that underpins those laws.
But the idea of arbitrary power exercised by any leader or political movement, no matter how much he or it claims to represent the poor and downtrodden – as Chávez does – is alien to all concepts of liberty. It is the legalism of the barbarian, and the instinctive political philosophy of all who are in revolt against democratic norms of behaviour.
The world must demand of Venezuela's authorities that they release Álvarez Paz immediately. The Organization of American States and other regional bodies must now forcefully insist on the effective restoration of constitutional norms in Venezuela. Only by doing so can they defend the principles established in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. The OAS needs to act soon, because Venezuelans are due to vote for a new parliament this coming September.
Last year, Chávez won a referendum that he had called to abolish term limits for presidents and other senior elected officials. Now, opinion polls are showing unprecedented levels of discontent over crime, inflation, and power and water shortages. There were big antigovernment protests in Caracas after a privately owned cable television channel, RCTV, was shut down. Venezuelans appear to be prepared to stop their country's steady drift toward dictatorship, which may also explain why Álvarez Paz was arrested.
Everyone who believes in and supports the democratic tide that swept Latin America following the fall of communism in Europe must affirm their commitment to monitoring the weak state of freedom of expression and democratic governance in Venezuela. It is not too late to recall Venezuela to the camp of free and democratic nations. To speak out for the freedom of Álvarez Paz is to defend the freedom of all Venezuelans.
This article is co-signed by Mikhail Kasyanov, a former prime minister of Russia; Francisco Bermudez, a former minister of national defence, Guatemala; Garry Kasparov, a former world chess champion and current opposition political activist in Russia; Javier Loaiza, a consultant and political analyst in Colombia and Don McKinnon, a former secretary general of the Commonwealth
*guardian.co.uk
The arrest of Oswaldo Álvarez Paz, a former president of Venezuela's Chamber of Deputies, governor of the Venezuelan state of Zulia, and presidential candidate, should concern the entire world because it demonstrates just how far President Hugo Chávez's regime is willing to stray from democratic norms. Standing silent as democracy atrophies in Venezuela is now not only immoral, but is becoming increasingly dangerous for all of Venezuela's people.
Álvarez Paz has a worldwide reputation for being an honourable man devoted to democratic principles. He has bravely sought to alert the world to the persecution that opponents of Chávez and his regime constantly suffer, as well as to the decline of democracy in his country over the decade of Chávez's rule. Indeed, his arrest on 22 March is compelling evidence of the truth of his testimony about the regime's nature, and of the danger that it poses to Venezuelans, whose freedoms apparently are being systematically stripped, and to Latin American more broadly, owing to Chávez's example to other would-be autocrats.
The seeming trigger for Álvarez Paz's arrest appears to have been his statements on Aló Ciudadano (Hello Citizen), a talk show broadcast by the private TV Channel Globovisión. Álvarez Paz commented on a resolution passed by the National Court of Spain (Audiencia Nacional de España) about alleged relations between the Venezuelan government, the Colombian guerilla group Farc, and the Spanish terrorist group Eta. Álvarez Paz rightly called for these allegations to be examined.
But, after simply calling for the law to be enforced and criminal activity investigated, Álvarez Paz was arrested on charges of conspiracy, spreading false information, and incitement of hatred. If convicted, he could be sentenced to up to 15 years in prison.
The arrest is important evidence of the promiscuous abuse of the legal system by Chávez and his functionaries in order to persecute, intimidate, and silence those who criticise his government. It also corroborates reports published by international organisations and institutions such as the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House about the increasing deterioration of political liberties in Venezuela.
Under Chávez's rule, a radical form of state-sanctioned lawlessness has taken hold in the country. You could say that Venezuela now exists as a "lawless legality", a political system within which officials deny that in making or interpreting laws they are bound in any way by the spirit of justice that underpins those laws.
But the idea of arbitrary power exercised by any leader or political movement, no matter how much he or it claims to represent the poor and downtrodden – as Chávez does – is alien to all concepts of liberty. It is the legalism of the barbarian, and the instinctive political philosophy of all who are in revolt against democratic norms of behaviour.
The world must demand of Venezuela's authorities that they release Álvarez Paz immediately. The Organization of American States and other regional bodies must now forcefully insist on the effective restoration of constitutional norms in Venezuela. Only by doing so can they defend the principles established in the Inter-American Democratic Charter. The OAS needs to act soon, because Venezuelans are due to vote for a new parliament this coming September.
Last year, Chávez won a referendum that he had called to abolish term limits for presidents and other senior elected officials. Now, opinion polls are showing unprecedented levels of discontent over crime, inflation, and power and water shortages. There were big antigovernment protests in Caracas after a privately owned cable television channel, RCTV, was shut down. Venezuelans appear to be prepared to stop their country's steady drift toward dictatorship, which may also explain why Álvarez Paz was arrested.
Everyone who believes in and supports the democratic tide that swept Latin America following the fall of communism in Europe must affirm their commitment to monitoring the weak state of freedom of expression and democratic governance in Venezuela. It is not too late to recall Venezuela to the camp of free and democratic nations. To speak out for the freedom of Álvarez Paz is to defend the freedom of all Venezuelans.
This article is co-signed by Mikhail Kasyanov, a former prime minister of Russia; Francisco Bermudez, a former minister of national defence, Guatemala; Garry Kasparov, a former world chess champion and current opposition political activist in Russia; Javier Loaiza, a consultant and political analyst in Colombia and Don McKinnon, a former secretary general of the Commonwealth
*guardian.co.uk
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)