Challenges to those in authority were much easier to mount on the Internet than through pamphlets, wall posters, on radio and television, or in the streets – and the new online challenges can come from beyond national boundaries.In the early days, despots were blissfully unaware.“The movement,” wrote Abbas Miliani of Stanford University, “was widely seen as a new non-violent, non-utopian and populist paradigm of revolution that infused twenty-first century Internet technology with people street power.” Dissidents were suppressed by state violence in the streets, but to prevent the Internet’s use by citizens clamoring for freedom and democracy in the future, regimes in Iran, China, Russia, and the Middle East took strong steps, learning from each other.
Challenges to those in authority were much easier to mount on the Internet than through pamphlets, wall posters, on radio and television, or in the streets – and the new online challenges can come from beyond national boundaries.In the early days, despots were blissfully unaware.Tags: Dissertation CommunicationPoultry Farming Business Plan SampleAdventure Critical Essay Finn HuckleberryCreative Writing Courses SydneyDuane Michals EssayCompare Islam Christianity EssayCreative Writing Evening Classes LondonChange Over Time Essay About Yourself
Specifically, in 2015: But because the Internet is global, these domestic activities are insufficient to suppress freedom.
Now, authoritarian states are trying to control global Internet governance.
[T]he nature of the technology itself has opened up a space of much greater democratic possibility.” As it’s turned out, “greater democratic possibility” is not universally admired.
Authoritarian regimes find their positions of power threatened by the disintermediation of the Internet, just as have previously protected businesses.
By 2019, global Internet commerce is expected to total $28 trillion, or one-eighth of all the sales in the world.
The Big Connect has brought more prosperity, better health and education, and closer social ties. Licklider of MIT called his concept of interconnected global computers: “Everyone could quickly access data and programs from any site.” In 1962, Licklider became the first head of the computer research program at DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, and a decade later ARPANET was up and running, linking government and university research centers.From 2005 to 2015, some “105 countries have seen a net decline, and only 61 have experienced a net improvement.” Last year, the ratings of 72 countries fell – the most since the slide began. We should maximize the opportunity for human freedom.” To ensure that happened, Internet governance derived from what was called the “multi-stakeholder model.” Groups of users, engineers, businesses, NGOs, and governments made decisions – mostly technical – by consensus.In 1994, Mitch Kapor, co-founder of Lotus, the software company that produced the digital spreadsheet revolution, declared, “We are entering an era of communication of the many to the many…Nearly every nation, for example, has its own definition of free speech.Before the Internet, countries could bar or censor publications that violated its rules, but the Internet makes communications across borders far easier.As scholar Christopher Walker wrote: "The focus of such efforts is not merely defending authoritarianism at home, but reshaping the international norms that stigmatize such governance. Behind the smoke screen of “Internet sovereignty” and “Internet security,” authoritarian regimes are doggedly working to neutralize democratic discourse and organization in cyberspace.Oppressive governments now routinely seek to apply repressive local standards to platforms such as Facebook, Google, and You Tube, with the aim of constraining the free flow of independent information and quarantining democracy." Freedom on the Internet presents thorny policy issues, even for democratic countries.It is encouraging that the United Nations General Assembly this summer passed a non-binding resolution that declares that people should have the same human rights online as they do off-line. The Snowden revelations and other disclosures about National Security Agency spying on leaders of such countries as Brazil and Germany led to widespread outrage and to calls from some countries to circumvent U.S.-based Internet services -- or, in the case of Chancellor Angela Merkel, to create a separate European Internet.In the end, however, the Internet could still prove Barlow correct – but only if technology’s pursuit of freedom receives a big helping of will, moral support, and good policy. Use of internet has become a normal day to day activity in the world.