IT-backed authoritarianism
 | The examples and perspective in this article may not represent a worldwide view of the subject. (March 2019) |
| Part of a series on |
| Algocracy |
|---|
 |
| Examples |
IT-backed authoritarianism, also known as techno-authoritarianism, digital authoritarianism or digital dictatorship,[1][2] refers to the state use of information technology in order to control or manipulate both foreign and domestic populations.[3] Tactics of digital authoritarianism may include mass surveillance including through biometrics such as facial recognition, internet firewalls and censorship, internet blackouts, disinformation campaigns, and digital social credit systems.[4][5] Although some institutions assert that this term should only be used to refer to authoritarian governments,[6] others argue that the tools of digital authoritarianism are being adopted and implemented by governments with "authoritarian tendencies", including democracies.[7]
Most notably, China and Russia have been accused by the right-wing Brookings Institution of leveraging the Internet and information technology to repress opposition domestically while undermining democracies abroad.[3]
Definition
[edit]IT-backed authoritarianism refers to an authoritarian regime using cutting-edge information technology in order to penetrate, control and shape the behavior of actors within society and the economy.[citation needed]
According to reports and articles on China's practice, the basis of the digital authoritarianism is an advanced, all-encompassing and in large parts real-time surveillance system, which merges government-run systems and data bases (e.g. traffic monitoring, financial credit rating, education system, health sector etc.) with company surveillance systems (e.g. of shopping preferences, activities on social media platforms etc.).[8] IT-backed authoritarianism institutionalizes the data transfer between companies and governmental agencies providing the government with full and regular access to data collected by companies. The authoritarian government remains the only entity with unlimited access to the collected data. IT-backed authoritarianism thus increases the authority of the regime vis-à-vis national and multinational companies as well as vis-à-vis other decentral or subnational political forces and interest groups. The collected data is utilized by the authoritarian regime to analyze and influence the behavior of a country’s citizens, companies and other institutions.[8] It does so with the help of algorithms based on the principles and norms of the authoritarian regime, automatically calculating credit scores for every individual and institution. In contrast to financial credit ratings, these “social credit scores” are based on the full range of collected surveillance data, including financial as well as non-financial information.[9] IT-backed authoritarianism only allows full participation in a country’s economy and society for those who have a good credit scoring and thus respect the rules and norms of the respective authoritarian regime. Behavior deviating from these norms incurs automatic punishment through a bad credit scoring, which leads to economic or social disadvantages (loan conditions, lower job opportunities, no participation in public procurement etc.). Severe violation or non-compliance can lead to the exclusion from any economic activities on the respective market or (for individuals) to an exclusion from public services.[citation needed]
Examples
[edit]China
[edit]China has been viewed as the cutting edge and the enabler of digital authoritarianism.[10] With its Great Firewall of a state-controlled Internet, it has deployed high-tech repression against Uyghurs in Xinjiang and exported surveillance and monitoring systems to 18 countries as of 2019.[3]
According to Freedom House, the China model of digital authoritarianism through Internet control against those who are critical of the CCP features legislations of censorship, surveillance using artificial intelligence (AI) and facial recognition, manipulation or removal of online content, cyberattacks and spear phishing, suspension and revocation of social media accounts, detention and arrests, and forced disappearance and torture, among other means.[2] A report by Carnegie Endowment for International Peace also highlights similar digital repression techniques.[11] In 2013, The Diplomat reported that the Chinese hackers behind the malware attacks on Falun Gong supporters in China, the Philippines, and Vietnam were the same ones responsible for attacks against foreign military powers, targeting email accounts and stealing Microsoft Outlook login information and email contents.[12]
The 2022 analysis by The New York Times of over 100,000 Chinese government bidding documents revealed a range of surveillance and data collection practices, from personal biometrics to behavioral data, which are fed into AI systems.[13] China utilizes these data capabilities not only to enhance governmental and infrastructural efficiency but also to monitor and suppress dissent among its population, particularly in Xinjiang, where the government targets the Uyghur community under the guise of counterterrorism and public security.[13]
Russia
[edit]The Russian model of digital authoritarianism relies on strict laws of digital expression and the technology to enforce them.[14] Since 2012, as part of a broader crackdown on civil society, the Russian Parliament has adopted numerous laws curtailing speech and expression.[15][16] Hallmarks of Russian digital authoritarianism include:[17]
- The surveillance of all Internet traffic through the System for Operative Investigative Activities (SORM) and the Semantic Archive;[18]
- Restrictive laws on the freedom of speech and expression, including the blacklisting of hundreds of thousands of websites,[19] and punishment including fines and jail time for activities including slander,[20] "insulting religious feelings,"[21] and "acts of extremism".[22]
- Infrastructure regulations including requirements for Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to install Deep Packet Inspection equipment under the 2019 Sovereign Internet Law.[23]
Myanmar
[edit]Since the coup d'état in February 2021, the military junta blocked all but 1,200 websites and imposed Internet shutdowns, with pro-military dominating the content on the remaining accessible websites.[24] In May 2021, Reuters reported that telecom and Internet service providers had been secretly ordered to install spyware allowing the military to "listen in on calls, view text messages and web traffic including emails, and track the locations of users without the assistance of the telecom and internet firms."[25] In February 2022, Norwegian service provider Telenor was forced to sell its operation to a local company aligned with the military junta.[26][27] The military junta also sought to criminalize virtual private networks (VPNs), imposed mandatory registration of devices, and increased surveillance on both social media platforms and via telecom companies.[27]
In July 2022, the military executed activist Kyaw Min Yu, after arresting him in November 2021 for prodemocracy social media posts criticizing the coup.[28][29]
Africa
[edit]A study by the African Digital Rights Network (ADRN) revealed that governments in ten African countries—South Africa, Cameroon, Zimbabwe, Uganda, Nigeria, Zambia, Sudan, Kenya, Ethiopia, and Egypt—have employed various forms of digital authoritarianism.[30] The most common tactics include digital surveillance, disinformation, Internet shutdowns, censorship legislation, and arrests for anti-government speech.[30] The researchers highlighted the growing trend of complete Internet or mobile system shutdowns.[30] Additionally, all ten countries utilized Internet surveillance, mobile intercept technologies, or artificial intelligence to monitor targeted individuals using specific keywords.[30]
References
[edit]- ^ "The global threat of China's digital authoritarianism". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2019-01-26.
- ^ a b "Freedom on the Net 2018 The Rise of Digital Authoritarianism". Freedom House. Archived from the original on 2019-03-08. Retrieved 2019-01-26.
- ^ a b c Meserole, Alina Polyakova and Chris (2019-08-26). "Exporting digital authoritarianism". Brookings. Retrieved 2022-01-05.
- ^ Brussee, Vincent (15 September 2021). "China's Social Credit System Is Actually Quite Boring". Foreign Policy. Retrieved 2022-01-05.
- ^ Yayboke, Erol; Brannen, Samuel (15 October 2020). "Promote and Build: A Strategic Approach to Digital Authoritarianism". www.csis.org. Retrieved 2022-01-05.
- ^ Meserole, Alina Polyakova and Chris (2019-08-26). "Exporting digital authoritarianism". Brookings. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ Yayboke, Erol; Brannen, Samuel (15 October 2020). "Promote and Build: A Strategic Approach to Digital Authoritarianism". www.csis.org. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ a b Mirjam Meissner (2016). China’s surveillance ambitions, The Wall Street Journal, 2 August 2016.
- ^ Caren Morrison (2016). How China Plans to Blacklist Financially Unstable Citizens, Fortune, 30 November 2015.
- ^ "Confronting the Rise of Digital Authoritarianism | The National Bureau of Asian Research (NBR)". Retrieved 2024-04-27.
- ^ Feldstein, Steven (September 2019). "The Global Expansion of AI Surveillance" (PDF). carnegieendowment.org. Retrieved April 27, 2024.
- ^ Quigley, J. T. "Falun Dafa Supporters in China, Philippines, Vietnam Attacked By Hackers". thediplomat.com. Retrieved 2024-07-14.
- ^ a b Qian, Isabelle; Xiao, Muyi; Mozur, Paul; Cardia, Alexander (2022-06-21). "Four Takeaways From a Times Investigation Into China's Expanding Surveillance State". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2024-04-29.
- ^ Morgus, Robert (2019). "The Spread of Russia's Digital Authoritarianism". Artificial Intelligence, China, Russia, and the Global Order: 89–97.
- ^ Beschastna, Tatyana (2013-01-01). "Freedom of Expression in Russia as it Relates to Criticism of the Government". Emory International Law Review. 27 (2): 1105. ISSN 1052-2840.
- ^ Gorbunova, Yulia (2017-07-18). "Online and On All Fronts: Russia's Assault on Freedom of Expression". Human Rights Watch.
- ^ Morgus, Robert (2019). "The Spread of Russia's Digital Authoritarianism". Artificial Intelligence, China, Russia, and the Global Order: 89–97.
- ^ Soldatov, Andrei; Borogan, Irina (2013). "Russia's Surveillance State". World Policy Journal. 30 (3): 23–30. doi:10.1177/0740277513506378. ISSN 0740-2775.
- ^ "Russia: Freedom on the Net 2021 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ Griffen, Scott (March 2017). "Defamation and Insult Laws in the OSCE Region". www.osce.org. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ "Russian MPs back harsher anti-blasphemy law". BBC News. 2013-04-10. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ Vasilyeva, Nataliya (2016-05-31). "Dozens in Russia imprisoned for social media likes, reposts". AP. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ "How Russia Is Stepping Up Its Campaign to Control the Internet". Time. Retrieved 2022-01-08.
- ^ Shahbaz, Adrian; Funk, Allie; Vesteinsson, Kian. "Freedom on the Net 2022 - Countering an Authoritarian Overhaul of the Internet". Freedom House. Retrieved April 27, 2024.
- ^ Potkin, Fanny; Mcpherson, Poppy (May 18, 2021). "Insight: How Myanmar's military moved in on the telecoms sector to spy on citizens". Reuters. Retrieved April 27, 2024.
- ^ McPherson, Poppy; Potkin, Fanny (February 11, 2022). "Exclusive-Myanmar firm poised to control Telenor unit after military backs bid-sources". Reuters. Retrieved April 27, 2024.
- ^ a b "Myanmar: Freedom on the Net 2022 Country Report". Freedom House. Retrieved 2024-04-28.
- ^ Funk, Allie; Shahbaz, Adrian; Vesteinsson, Kian (November 21, 2023). "Freedom on the Net 2023 - The Repressive Power of Artificial Intelligence". Freedom House. Retrieved April 28, 2024.
- ^ Regan, Helen; Mogul, Rhea (July 25, 2022). "Myanmar junta executes leading democracy activists". CNN. Retrieved April 28, 2024.
- ^ a b c d Bhalla, Nita (March 4, 2021). "'Digital authoritarianism' threatening basic rights in Africa, study says". Reuters. Retrieved April 28, 2024.