Net speculation about Singapore and Facebook warning

Net speculation about Singapore and Facebook warning

The internet can promote greater openness in countries like Singapore, writes Evgeny Morozov on the Foreign Policy website.

He also points to the dangers activists of any kind face on social networking websites like Facebook in his article, Why promoting democracy via the internet is often not a good idea.

The internet cannot make much of a difference in western democracies nor in "authoritarian" states like Russia and China, he says. But it can have greater impact on other countries, he writes:

Free and democratic states do gain from internet technologies, even though their impact is not most significant, as there is a limit as to how much technology could accomplish in countries that already have a vibrant civil society and well-functioning democratic institutions.

On the other hand, mixed regimes - those that are not outright authoritarian and have respect for some basic human rights (Singapore comes to mind as an example) - might stand to lose most from the proliferation of internet technologies, simply because the online mobilization benefits bestowed upon their nascent civil society could not be met by the equal degree of repression of activists – at least, not without the country losing its "mixed" status and becoming a dictatorship (which, in most cases, would also carry prohibitive economic costs).

The wording is curious: Why should a so-called "mixed regime" like Singapore lose from the growth of the internet? On the contrary, Singapore allows free internet access. And the talk of "repression" and "dictatorship" seems very far-fetched in the Singapore context. Singapore has a popularly elected government. But, yes, the internet has made a world of difference by providing new channels of information and interaction.

Morozov cautions about Facebook:

Facebook activism could also easily backfire for it has one inherent flaw: it allows authorities to quickly and easily identify all dissenters - even those who were willing to lend only their virtual support to the campaigns - and put them on their "to be watched closely" list (and then to actually rely on technology to carry out their surveillance).

The internet has not led to greater openness in Russia and China, he says:

Could it be that technology's impact actually helps bolster existing authoritarianism? Existing political structures have not been shaken (or even threatened) by any of the recent protests facilitated by technology; on the contrary, such governments have not only withstood these protests, they have also adapted very fast). The most sophisticated regimes – like China and Russia, for example – have even gone beyond mere defensive strategies and are actively experimenting with offensive strategies like spinning the Web to advance their own political ideologies by hiring paid internet commentators, for example.

http://forums.delphiforums.com/sunkopitiam/messages?msg=27894.1