Evgeny Morozov: How the Internet strengthens dictatorships

Prevoditelj: Silvija Florijan Recezent: Tilen Pigac - EFZG

Good morning. I think, as a grumpy Eastern European,

Dobro jutro. Mislim da su me, kao mrzovoljnog istočnog Europljanina,

I was brought in to play the pessimist this morning. So bear with me.

doveli da glumim pesimista ovo jutro. Pa budite strpljivi.

Well, I come from the former Soviet Republic of Belarus,

Dakle, dolazim iz bivše Sovjetske Republike Bjelorusije,

which, as some of you may know,

koja, kao što neki od vas znaju,

is not exactly an oasis of liberal democracy.

nije baš oaza liberalne demokracije.

So that's why I've always been fascinated

Upravo zato sam oduvijek bio fasciniran

with how technology could actually reshape

načinom na koji tehnologija može preoblikovati

and open up authoritarian societies like ours.

i otvoriti autoritarna društva poput naših.

So, I'm graduating college

Dakle, završavam fakultet

and, feeling very idealistic,

i, osjećajući se vrlo idealistično,

I decided to join the NGO

odlučio sam pridružiti se nevladinoj organizaciji

which actually was using new media

što je zapravo bilo korištenje novog medija

to promote democracy and media reform

da se promovira demokracija i medijska reforma

in much of the former Soviet Union.

u većem dijelu bivšeg Sovjetskog Saveza.

However, to my surprise,

Međutim, na moje iznenađenje,

I discovered that dictatorships

otkrio sam da se diktature

do not crumble so easily.

ne raspadaju tako lako.

In fact, some of them actually

Naime, neke od njih su zapravo

survived the Internet challenge,

preživjele izazov,

and some got even more repressive.

i neke su postale još represivnije.

So this is when I ran out of my idealism and

Dakle, ovdje sam prestao biti idealističan i

decided to quit my NGO job

odlučio sam dati otkaz u nevladinoj organizaciji

and actually study how the Internet could impede democratization.

i zapravo proučavati kako Internet može spriječiti demokratizaciju.

Now, I must tell you that this was never

Sada vam moram reći da ovo nikad nije bio

a very popular argument,

jako popularan argument.

and it's probably not very popular yet

I vjerojatno još nije jako popularan

with some of you sitting in this audience.

nekima od vas koji sjede u ovoj publici.

It was never popular with many political leaders,

Nikad nije bio popularan mnogim političkim vođama,

especially those in the United States

osobito onima u Sjedinjenim Državama

who somehow thought that new media

koji su na neki način mislili da će novi medij

would be able to do what missiles couldn't.

biti sposoban učiniti ono što projektili nisu mogli.

That is, promote democracy in difficult places

Odnosno promovirati demokraciju u problematičnim mjestima

where everything else has already been tried and failed.

gdje je sve ostalo već bilo isprobano i nije uspjelo.

And I think by 2009,

I mislim 2009.,

this news has finally reached Britain,

ta je vijest napokon došla do Britanije.

so I should probably add Gordon Brown to this list as well.

Dakle trebao bih vjerojatno dodati i Gordona Browna na ovu listu.

However, there is an underlying argument about logistics,

Međutim, postoji temeljni argument o logistici

which has driven so much of this debate. Right?

koja je toliko podržavala ovu raspravu. Točno?

So if you look at it close enough,

Ako pogledate bolje,

you'll actually see that much of this

shvatit ćete da se ovdje najviše

is about economics.

radi o ekonomiji.

The cybertopians say, much like fax machines

Kiberutopisti govore, slično kao faksevi

and Xerox machines did in the '80s,

i kopirni strojevi '80-ih,

blogs and social networks

blogovi i društvene mreže

have radically transformed the economics of protest,

radikalno su promijenile ekonomiju protesta.

so people would inevitably rebel.

Stoga će se ljudi neizbježno pobuniti.

To put it very simply,

Da se najjednostavnije izrazim,

the assumption so far has been

pretpostavka je dosada bila

that if you give people enough connectivity,

da ako ljude dovoljno povežeš,

if you give them enough devices,

ako im daš dovoljno naprava,

democracy will inevitably follow.

demokracija će neizbježno uslijediti.

And to tell you the truth,

I da vam kažem iskreno,

I never really bought into this argument,

nikada nisam stvarno vjerovao u to,

in part because I never saw three American presidents

djelomično zato što nikada nisam vidio tri američka predsjednika

agree on anything else in the past.

koja se slažu oko bilo čega u prošlosti.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But, you know, even beyond that,

No znate, čak s druge strane,

if you think about the logic underlying it,

ako razmislite o logici iza svega toga,

is something I call iPod liberalism,

to je nešto što zovem iPod liberalizam.

where we assume that every single Iranian or Chinese

Gdje možemo pretpostaviti da svaki Iranac ili Kinez

who happens to have and love his iPod

koji ima i voli svoj iPod

will also love liberal democracy.

ujedno voli liberalnu demokraciju.

And again, I think this is kind of false.

I opet, mislim da to nije točno.

But I think a much bigger problem with this

No mislim da je veći problem u tome

is that this logic --

što je ova logika --

that we should be dropping iPods not bombs --

da bi trebali bacati iPodove, a ne bombe --

I mean, it would make a fascinating title

mislim da bi to bio fascinantan naslov

for Thomas Friedman's new book.

nove knjige Thomasa Friedmana.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But this is rarely a good sign. Right?

No to je rijetko dobar znak. Zar ne?

So, the bigger problem with this logic

Dakle, veći je problem s ovom logikom

is that it confuses the intended

u tome da miješa predviđene

versus the actual uses of technology.

i stvarne namjene tehnologije.

For those of you who think that

Za one od vas koji misle da bi nam

new media of the Internet

novi medij interneta

could somehow help us avert genocide,

mogao nekako pomoći da spriječimo genocid,

should look no further than Rwanda,

ne bi trebao tražiti dalje od Ruande.

where in the '90s it was actually two radio stations

'90-ih su postojale zapravo dvije radijske postaje

which were responsible for fueling much of the ethnic hatred in the first place.

koje su prvenstveno bile odgovorne za rasplamsavanje etničke mržnje.

But even beyond that, coming back to the Internet,

No s druge strane, vraćajući se na Internet,

what you can actually see

zapravo možete vidjeti

is that certain governments

da su neke vlade

have mastered the use of cyberspace

ovladale korištenjem kiberprostora

for propaganda purposes. Right?

radi propagandnih ciljeva. Točno?

And they are building what I call the Spinternet.

I one grade nešto što zovem spinternetom.

The combination of spin, on the one hand,

Kombinacija spina, s jedne strane,

and the Internet on the other.

i Interneta, s druge.

So governments from Russia to China to Iran

Vlade od Rusije do Kine i Irana

are actually hiring, training and paying bloggers

zapravo angažiraju, treniraju i plaćaju blogere

in order to leave ideological comments

da ostave ideološke komentare

and create a lot of ideological blog posts

i stvore puno ideoloških postova na blogu

to comment on sensitive political issues. Right?

da komentiraju osjetljiva politička pitanja. Točno?

So you may wonder, why on Earth are they doing it?

Vi se možete pitati pa zašto to rade?

Why are they engaging with cyberspace?

Zašto se bave kiberprostorom?

Well my theory is that

Moja je teorija da se

it's happening because censorship actually

to događa zato što je cenzura zapravo

is less effective than you think it is in many of those places.

manje učinkovita nego što mislite u tim mjestima.

The moment you put something critical in a blog,

Onaj trenutak kad stavite nešto kritički na blog,

even if you manage to ban it immediately,

čak i ako to uspijete odmah zabraniti,

it will still spread around thousands and thousands of other blogs.

i dalje će se širiti tisućama i tisućama drugih blogova.

So the more you block it,

Što to više blokirate,

the more it emboldens people to actually avoid the censorship

više će utjecati na ljude da zapravo izbjegnu cenzuru

and thus win in this cat-and-mouse game.

i tako pobijedi u ovoj igri mačke i miša.

So the only way to control this message

Dakle, jedini način da se kontrolira ta poruka

is actually to try to spin it

jest da se zapravo pokuša zavrtiti (spin)

and accuse anyone who has written something critical

i optuži svatko tko je napisao nešto kritički

of being, for example, a CIA agent.

da je, npr., agent CIA-e.

And, again, this is happening quite often.

I opet, to se događa dosta često.

Just to give you an example of how it works in China, for example.

Navest ću vam primjer kako to funkcionira u Kini.

There was a big case in February 2009

Dogodio se veliki slučaj u veljači 2009.

called "Elude the Cat."

po nazivu "Izbjegni mačku."

And for those of you who didn't know, I'll just give a little summary.

I za one koji ne znaju, dat ću kratak sažetak.

So what happened is that a 24-year-old man,

24-godišnji muškarac,

a Chinese man, died in prison custody.

Kinez, umro je u pritvoru.

And police said that it happened

Policija je rekla da se to dogodilo

because he was playing hide and seek,

zato što se on igrao skrivača,

which is "elude the cat" in Chinese slang,

što je "izbjeći mačku" u kineskom slengu,

with other inmates and hit his head

s ostalim zatvorenicima, i udario je glavom

against the wall,

u zid.

which was not an explanation which sat well with many Chinese bloggers.

Što nije objašnjenje s kojim su se složili mnogi kineski blogeri.

So they immediately began posting a lot of critical comments.

Odmah su počeli pisati puno kritičkih komentara.

In fact, QQ.com, which is a popular Chinese website,

Naime, QQ.com, popularna kineska stranica,

had 35,000 comments

imala je 35.000 komentara

on this issue within hours.

o tom pitanju u roku od nekoliko sati.

But then authorities did something very smart.

No zatim su vlasti napravile nešto vrlo lukavo.

Instead of trying to purge these comments,

Umjesto da pokušaju ukloniti te komentare,

they instead went and reached out to the bloggers.

obratili su se blogerima.

And they basically said, "Look guys. We'd like you to become netizen investigators."

U osnovi su rekli, "Gledajte. Željeli bismo da postanete istraživači na Mreži."

So 500 people applied,

500 ljudi se prijavilo

and four were selected to actually go and tour the facility in question,

i četvero ih je odabrano da zapravo ode i pregleda sporni objekt,

and thus inspect it and then blog about it.

i tako ga provjeri, i onda piše na blogu o tome.

Within days the entire incident was forgotten,

Za nekoliko je dana cijeli incident bio zaboravljen,

which would have never happened if they simply tried to block the content.

što se ne bi nikad dogodilo da su jednostavno pokušali blokirati sadržaj.

People would keep talking about it for weeks.

Ljudi bi o tome govorili tjednima.

And this actually fits with another interesting theory

I to se zapravo uklapa u druge zanimljive teorije

about what's happening in authoritarian states

o tome što se događa u autoritativnim državama,

and in their cyberspace.

i u njihovom kiberprostoru.

This is what political scientists call authoritarian deliberation,

To je ono što politolozi zovu autoritativnim razmišljanjem.

and it happens when governments are actually reaching out to their critics

I događa se kad se vlade zapravo obraćaju svojim kritičarima

and letting them engage with each other online.

i dopuštaju im da zajedno surađuju jedni s drugima online.

We tend to think

Mi težimo tome da mislimo

that somehow this is going to harm these dictatorships,

da će to nekako naškoditi tim diktaturama,

but in many cases it only strengthens them.

no u mnogo slučajeva to ih samo jača.

And you may wonder why.

I vi se možete pitati zašto.

I'll just give you a very short list of reasons

Dat ću vam jako kratak popis razloga

why authoritarian deliberation

zašto autoritativno razmišljanje

may actually help the dictators.

može zapravo pomoći diktatorima.

And first it's quite simple.

I prvi je dosta jednostavan.

Most of them operate in a complete information vacuum.

Većina njih djeluje u potpunom informacijskom vakuumu.

They don't really have the data they need

Oni zapravo nemaju podatke koje trebaju

in order to identify emerging threats facing the regime.

da bi identificirali nastale prijetnje s kojima se suočava režim.

So encouraging people to actually go online

Ohrabrivati ljude da zapravo idu online

and share information and data

i dijele informaciju i podatke

on blogs and wikis is great

na blogovima i wikijima je odlično

because otherwise, low level apparatchiks and bureaucrats

zato što će inače, niskopozicionirani aparatčiki i birokrati

will continue concealing what's actually happening in the country, right?

nastaviti sakrivati što se doista događa u zemlji, zar ne?

So from this perspective, having blogs and wikis

Iz ove perspektive, postojanje blogova i wikija

produce knowledge has been great.

koji stvaraju znanje je sjajno.

Secondly, involving public in any decision making

Drugo, uključivanje publike u bilo koje donošenje odluka

is also great

također je sjajno

because it helps you to share the blame

zato što vam pomaže da dijelite krivnju

for the policies which eventually fail.

za politike koje eventualno ne uspiju.

Because they say, "Well look, we asked you,

Zato što kažu, "Gledajte, pitali smo vas,

we consulted you, you voted on it.

savjetovali se s vama, glasali ste za to.

You put it on the front page of your blog.

Vi to stavljate na prednju stranu svog bloga.

Well, great. You are the one who is to blame."

Pa, dobro. Vi ste jedini koji se može okriviti."

And finally, the purpose of

I napokon, svrha je

any authoritarian deliberation efforts

bilo kojih nastojanja autoritativnog razmišljanja

is usually to increase the legitimacy of the regimes, both at home and abroad.

obično da povećaju zakonitost režima, i kod kuće i u inozemstvu.

So inviting people to all sorts of public forums,

Pozivanje ljudi na sve vrste javnih foruma,

having them participate in decision making,

njihovo sudjelovanje u donošenju odluka,

it's actually great.

zapravo je odlično.

Because what happens is that then

Zato što tada

you can actually point to this initiative and say,

možete zapravo ukazati na tu inicijativu i reći,

"Well, we are having a democracy. We are having a forum."

"Dobro, mi imamo demokraciju. Mi imamo forum."

Just to give you an example,

Navest ću vam primjer,

one of the Russian regions, for example,

jedna ruska regija, na primjer,

now involves its citizens

sada uključuje svoje građane

in planning its strategy up until year 2020.

u planiranje svoje strategije do 2020. godine.

Right? So they can go online

Točno? Oni mogu ići online

and contribute ideas on what that region would look like by the year 2020.

i doprinijeti idejama o tome kako bi regija trebala izgledati do 2020. godine.

I mean, anyone who has been to Russia would know

Mislim, svatko tko je bio u Rusiji zna

that there was no planning in Russia for the next month.

da tamo nema planiranja za sljedeći mjesec.

So having people involved in planning for 2020

Dakle, uključivanje ljudi u planiranje za 2020.

is not necessarily going to change anything,

neće nužno promijeniti nešto.

because the dictators are still the ones who control the agenda.

Zato što su diktatori ti koji kontroliraju dnevni red.

Just to give you an example from Iran,

Navest ću vam primjer iz Irana.

we all heard about the Twitter revolution

Svi smo čuli za Twitter revoluciju

that happened there,

koja se tamo dogodila.

but if you look close enough, you'll actually see

No ako pobliže pogledate, zapravo ćete vidjeti

that many of the networks and blogs

da je puno mreža i blogova

and Twitter and Facebook were actually operational.

i Twitter i Facebook, zapravo operativno.

They may have become slower,

Možda su postali sporiji,

but the activists could still access it

no aktivisti su im još mogli pristupiti

and actually argue that having access to them

i zapravo raspravljati da je pristup njima

is actually great for many authoritarian states.

ustvari odličan za mnoge autoritativne države.

And it's great simply because

I odlično je jednostavno zato što

they can gather open source intelligence.

mogu okupiti inteligenciju otvorenog koda.

In the past it would take you weeks, if not months,

U prošlosti su vam trebali tjedni, ako ne i mjeseci,

to identify how Iranian activists connect to each other.

da otkrijete kako se iranski aktivisti međusobno povezuju.

Now you actually know how they connect to each other

Sada zapravo znate kako se međusobno povezuju

by looking at their Facebook page.

gledajući njihovu stranicu na Facebook-u.

I mean KGB, and not just KGB,

KGB, i ne samo KGB,

used to torture in order to actually get this data.

mučio je da dođe do tih podataka.

Now it's all available online.

Sada je sve dostupno online.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But I think the biggest conceptual pitfall

No mislim da je najveća konceptualna zamka

that cybertopians made

koju rade kiberutopisti

is when it comes to digital natives, people who have grown up online.

ta kad se radi o digitalnim starosjediocima, ljudima koji su odrasli online.

We often hear about cyber activism,

Često čujemo o kibernetičkom aktivizmu,

how people are getting more active because of the Internet.

kako ljudi postaju aktivniji zbog Interneta.

Rarely hear about cyber hedonism, for example,

Rijetko čujemo o kibernetičkom hedonizmu, na primjer,

how people are becoming passive.

kako ljudi postaju pasivniji.

Why? Because they somehow assume that the Internet

Zašto? Zato što nekako pretpostavljaju da će Internet

is going to be the catalyst of change

biti katalizator promjene

that will push young people into the streets,

koja će gurnuti mlade ljude na ulice,

while in fact it may actually be the new opium for the masses

dok će ustvari možda biti novi opijum za mase

which will keep the same people in their rooms downloading pornography.

koji će držati iste ljude u njihovim sobama da preuzimaju pornografiju.

That's not an option being considered too strongly.

Ta se opcija previše ne razmatra.

So for every digital renegade that is revolting in the streets of Tehran,

Za svakog digitalnog odmetnika koji diže ustanak na ulicama Teherana,

there may as well be two digital captives

postoje možda dva digitalna zarobljenika

who are actually rebelling only in the World of Warcraft.

koji se ustvari bune samo u igri World of Warcraft.

And this is realistic. And there is nothing wrong about it

I to je realno. I tu nema ničeg pogrešnog

because the Internet has greatly empowered many of these young people

zato što je Internet uvelike osnažio mnoge od tih mladih ljudi.

and it plays a completely different social role for them.

I to ima potpuno drugačiju socijalnu ulogu za njih.

If you look at some of the surveys

Ako pogledate neke od anketa

on how the young people actually benefit from the Internet,

o tome kakvu korist od interneta zapravo imaju mladi ljudi,

you'll see that the number of teenagers in China, for example,

vidjet ćete da je broj tinejdžera u Kini, na primjer,

for whom the Internet actually broadens their sex life,

za koje Internet ustvari proširuje njihov seksualni život,

is three times more than in the United States.

tri puta veći nego u Sjedinjenim Državama.

So it does play a social role,

To doista igra socijalnu ulogu,

however it may not necessarily lead to political engagement.

međutim nužno ne dovodi do političkog angažmana.

So the way I tend to think of it

Dakle, način na koji težim misliti je

is like a hierarchy of cyber-needs in space,

poput hijerarhije kibernetičkih potreba u prostoru.

a total rip-off from Abraham Maslow.

Totalno potkradanje Abrahama Maslowa.

But the point here is that

Poanta je u tome da

when we get the remote Russian village online,

kad postavimo zabačeno rusko selo online,

what will get people to the Internet

ono što će privući ljude na Internet

is not going to be the reports from Human Rights Watch.

nisu izvještaji nevladine organizacije Human Rights Watch.

It's going to be pornography, "Sex and the City,"

To će biti pornografija, Seks u gradu,

or maybe watching funny videos of cats.

ili možda gledanje smiješnih videa mačaka.

So this is something you have to recognize.

To je nešto što morate prepoznati.

So what should we do about it?

Što bismo trebali učiniti u svezi s tim?

Well I say we have to stop thinking

Ja kažem da moramo prestati razmišljati

about the number of iPods per capita

o broju iPod-ova po čovjeku

and start thinking about ways in which

i početi razmišljati o načinima na koje

we can empower intellectuals,

možemo osnažiti intelektualce,

dissidents, NGOs and then the members of civil society.

disidente, nevladine organizacije, i tek tada pripadnike građanskog društva.

Because even what has been happening up 'til now

Zato što čak ono što se do sada događalo

with the Spinternet and authoritarian deliberation,

sa spinternetom i autoritativnim razmišljanjem,

there is a great chance that those voices will not be heard.

postoji velika mogućnost da se ti glasovi neće čuti.

So I think we should shatter some of our utopian assumptions

Mislim da bi trebali razbiti neke od naših utopijskih pretpostavki

and actually start doing something about it.

i ustvari poduzeti nešto u svezi s tim.

Thank you.

Hvala vam.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)