“Authoritarianism and secrecy breed incompetence; the two feed on each other. It’s a vicious cycle. Governments with authoritarian tendencies point towards what is in fact their own incompetence as rationale to give them more power”
–John Marshall
Imagine a society where every step is tracked, every conversation is being watched, and all your actions are analyzed by artificial intelligence and other digital systems in an effort to control everything you do. This dystopian reality is taking shape in many authoritarian states today. It is increasingly common for authoritarian regimes to leverage digital technologies in efforts to surveil, repress, and manipulate their citizens. Among these regimes, China, Russia, and Iran are prominent examples of states employing digital authoritarianism — the utilization of digital technologies to censor, manipulate, and surveil their populations. It is important to consider the distinct strategies used by these three authoritarian powers when exploring the consequences of digital authoritarianism.
China
In China, digital authoritarianism emerged during the late 1990’s with their “Great Firewall”, a nation wide system that prevents Chinese citizens from accessing many foreign sites. The “Great Firewall” employs many different types of censorship across the Cchinese- based internet. Although a massive phenomenon, the limits of the firewall have not been clearly defined due to the inability of researchers to find a viable amount of clients to “test connectivity.” China was the origin of digital age censorship with its “Great Firewall” and high-tech suppression recently implemented in Xinjiang, where a combination of digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence and facial recognition, were used to surveil, manipulate, and control the population in the area.
China has also advanced the censorship of the Chinese population with their social credit system, which has the ability to sanction and publicly shame individuals for not subscribing to the Chinese Communist Party’s political ideology.
Due to Beijing’s extensive experience using digital tools for domestic censorship and surveillance, they have become the main supplier for several authoritarian regimes looking to build their own surveillance system, exporting surveillance and monitoring systems to at least 18 countries. The growing export of new technologies and development of new methodologies by China signals a global shift, one in which authoritarian regimes are leveraging digital tools to suppress the voice of individuals and shape global norms in their favor.
China’s relationship with digital authoritarianism is expansive and influential, as the country has implemented measures not only domestically, but also internationally to keep its population under control. Through the use of facial recognition, artificial intelligence, and implementing strategic authoritarian measures on their population, China has created a surveillance system of massive scale. As the originator of digital authoritarianism, China is a distinct model of digital authoritarianism and supplier of surveillance technologies for other authoritarian regimes
Russia
Russia’s engagement with digital authoritarianism began in the early 2000s with adaptations of Soviet-era surveillance technologies for the digital age. Just as the Chinese government made efforts to control their population, Russia followed similar footsteps. In 2014, Russia began making both legal and technical moves to establish a so-called ‘sovereign internet,’ modeled after China’s approach. If successful, the Russian government would be able to, at least partially, isolate the Russian internet from the rest of the world.
Beyond censorship, Russian companies export surveillance and hacking technologies, especially to post-Soviet states. Russia’s exportation of digital surveillance goods can diminish and suppress the voices of citizens that speak negatively about the Russian government. Although there is a need for further study into the government’s direct involvement in this export of surveillance technologies, the exportation of technology used for digital authoritarian measures poses a threat to democracy because it enables other governments to engage in digital authoritarianism and censorship.
In conjunction with China, the Russian exportation of digital surveillance technologies shines a light on a troubling global trend. As new governments adopt these digital authoritarian practices, democratic ideals erode in global society. This creates a world in which freedoms are undermined rather than promoted to consolidate power. This connection between China and Russia signals a growing challenge to democratic norms on a global scale, potentially creating a future where government-based digital control is normal.
Iran
Following revolutionary turmoil in 1979 and war against Iraq, Iran’s Islamic republic was established. This regime is openly authoritarian, as shown by the blatant repression and imposition of constraints on civil liberties. Iran’s adoption of digital surveillance methods emerged with the rise of the internet during the 2000s as part of its broader strategy of political repression. Iran has a past riddled with censorship and repressing human rights activists and journalists. Iran’s security agencies rely on rudimentary technical expertise and human information gathering to track political activities both within and beyond their borders, enabling them to plan retaliatory or preventive actions. While not all tactics in this repressive toolkit are new, digital surveillance increases the impact and reach of potential threats against “transnational activists and their networks”.
When Iran enhanced its capacities for internet control in 2009, protests ignited by digital media caused the regime to take steps to censor and control the population. Authorities began blocking websites and arresting critical bloggers as early as the early 2000s. As circumvention and anonymization tools evolved, the Iranian government adopted more aggressive tactics, such as deep packet inspection, hacking opposition media, and conducting targeted surveillance. The Other online communities who are considered to transgress official norms were also targeted. In 2014, for instance, six young Iranians were detained for circulating a home-made music video with an interpretation of Pharrell Williams’ song “Happy”. These efforts were aimed at controlling the population and suppressing dissent through digital authoritarianism.
Impact on Global Democracy and Human Rights
Digital authoritarianism obviously impacts democracy and human rights. Countries that implement digital authoritarianism do not only limit their citizens’ freedom but can also impact other nations directly or indirectly. In addition to consolidating power, digital authoritarianism allows authoritarian regimes to undermine democratic institutions, engage in malicious cyber activity, and export misinformation, harming global security. This threatens the national security of the United States and other democratic nations, especially those with less digital infrastructure and security which gives rise to vulnerability to external manipulation through digital technologies. As digital authoritarianism practices spread globally, they risk shifting the global norms away from democratic ideals, making it important to oppose and reject such practices wherever they emerge.
Future Outlook
As we look to the future with an optimistic eye, it is important to consider the real and probable advancements in technology. With modern internet applications and social media, the fundamental principles essential to democracy—trust, informed dialogue, a shared sense of reality, mutual consent, and participation—are being tested. Facebook is becoming the world’s largest news source; 44% of people across 26 countries surveyed say they use it for news. Staggering statistics like this give credence to the claims that social media could act as a gateway to digital authoritarianism ideals.
With the suspicious business model of social media platforms to capture a massive amount of attention and monetize it, these platforms can have an impact on public discourse and civil debate. This, along with the fact that more people are relying on social media for information and expression, shows how digital authoritarianism practices could be carried out through these platforms. Social media’s issue of misinformation is especially prominent in political discourse. For example, political ads during the 2016 election season on social media were extremely divisive and often contained messages that were manufactured to spark uncivil discourse. The thousands of ads did not refer to a specific candidate but merely discussed topics that had potential to ignite communication that undermines democratic ideals. For example, one sponsored ad was promoted to ignite divide through text and a graphic that portrayed law enforcement in such a way to spark uncivil racial discourse. This kind of manipulation threatens to reshape political engagement in a way that benefits authoritarian practices and promotes authoritarian ideals.
Artificial Intelligence is another important development we must consider with respect to digital authoritarianism. The rise of digital artificial intelligence raises numerous questions to be put forward. With recent AI developments, digital authoritarianism could be progressed even further in certain regimes. Artificial intelligence poses an existential threat to democracy due to the sheer amount of misinformation and propaganda that it can produce. This could undermine efforts put forth by government officials which threatens democratic values and could harm the citizens by reducing political accountability. Specifically, AI could manipulate public opinion polls in the future through the use of unique communication tools. Since democracy requires the citizens to hold their government accountable through free and fair election processes, AI manipulating public opinion would in turn threaten electoral integrity.
The further development of generative AI is dangerous and a threat to democracy due to its potential for extreme microtargeting outlook; for example, AI could generate false content that caters to specific audiences and even individuals, in turn spreading misinformation efficiently to specific constituencies. This could lead to a new era of digital authoritarianism, with regimes such as China, Russia, Iran, or other nations using AI to manipulate their citizens and stifle dissent on an unprecedented scale. This use of AI in digital authoritarianism could involve new surveillance systems, election manipulation, and widespread propaganda.
Action is needed at this moment to put up technological safeguards, to limit AI’s ability to generate anti-democratic content for malicious use, and to pass political policy to prevent digital attacks and the distribution of authoritarian ideals. With democratic values and world peace on the line, now is the time for politicians and citizens alike, to take action to limit digital authoritarianism.
Featured/Headline Image Caption and Citation: General Photos: Protest, Taken on January 4, 2019, Photo by Richard | Image sourced from Flickr | Attribution License, no changes made