Skip to main content

President Obama has declared that access to the world of information, via the Internet, should be considered a basic human right. This is, of course, something you’d expect me to agree with. In The Transparent Society I made a case for such openness based on multiple levels:

1- It is morally and ethically imperative.

2- It is the best way to achieve justice.

3- Our basic societal “organs”- including fair markets, democracy, science and even art function better when all players can make decisions based upon full knowledge.

4- It creates a situation in which Enlightenment Civilization will ultimately “win.”

Now, we’re being a bit redundant here, since desiderata 1,2&3 are only positive things from the viewpoint of people who are members of an Enlightenment Civilization. These traits are not orthogonal. Even the way some of you reacted to point number four -- by frowning over my chosen words, my notion of one civilization “winning” against its competitors -- even that reaction is itself a trait of having been raised in the Enlightenment’s modern liberal societies.

Few cultures ever saw moral fault in hoping for their own success, at the expense of others. Survival was a zero-sum game, until the Enlightenment discovered positive sum virtues.

The ultimate irony is that, in order for positive-sum thinking to prevail in the future world of our children - and for diversity to reign in peace - the overall worldview of enlightenment values (values that appreciate diversity) will have to “win” in the most general sense. Freedom - and especially the freedom to know and to speak that is embodied in the internet - must prevail... and those forces that restrict freedom must fail.

This is why the world’s despotic regimes reacted so negatively to President Obama’s assertion of a right to internet access.  They know that:

a) open information flows, especially a secular trend toward more transparency worldwide, will be inherently lethal to their  mode of rule, and

b) increases in light flowing over fully engaged enlightenment nations and their institutions only makes them stronger. Sure, some doses of light can be inconvenient to individual leaders, parties or clades. But the overall societies only get healthier.

Let’s deal with each of these assertions.





= Transparency as an Openly Aggressive Weapon Against Despots =

We begin by quoting liberally from a recent article in WIRE-online.

”When Hosni Mubarak shut down Egypt’s internet and cellphone communications, it seemed that all U.S. officials could do was ask him politely to change his mind. But the American military does have a second set of options, if it ever wants to force connectivity on a country against its ruler’s wishes. There’s just one wrinkle. “It could be considered an act of war,” says John Arquilla, a leading military futurist and a professor at the Naval Postgraduate School.

“The U.S. military has no shortage of devices — many of them classified — that could restore connectivity to a restive populace cut off from the outside world by its rulers. It’s an attractive option for policymakers who want an option for future Egypts, between doing nothing and sending in the Marines. And it might give teeth to the Obama administration’s demand that foreign governments consider internet access an inviolable human right.

“Consider the Commando Solo, the Air Force airborne broadcasting center. A revamped cargo plane, the Commando Solo beams out psychological operations in AM and FM for radio, and UHF and VHF for TV. Arquilla doesn’t want to go into detail how the classified plane could get a denied internet up and running again, but if it flies over a bandwidth-denied area, suddenly your Wi-Fi bars will go back up to full strength. That leads to another possibility: “Just give people Thuraya satellite phones,” says John Pike of The cheapish phones hunt down signals from space hardware.”

I’ve been talking about this concept with John Arquilla and his colleagues for many years. Back in 2001 - at the CIA and several defense agencies - I described more than a dozen methods to cheaply spread key elements of an international civil society into closed or despotic nations, in ways almost-guaranteed to create win-win situations and to corner tyrants, at little risk to ourselves.  I cannot claim that the tools listed above originated with those speeches. (I get contradictory reports about that, and in the end it doesn’t matter.) Still, I am glad there’s been movement in the right direction.

There are many other measures, not listed in the WIRED piece, that can be effective across a wide range of circumstances. At one extreme - that of open but not-yet-violent hostility -- calls for particular and peculiar aggressiveness. During the run-up to the latest Iraq war, at the same meeting where I proposed most of the measures listed in the WIRED article, I also suggested the ultimate in people-empowering and tyrant-disempowering technologies...

...developing and then dropping into such a nation several million “volksradios” that would provide Iraqis with an entirely separate system of packet-switched conversation, outside the dictator’s control. Also, incidentally, such a system would provide our intelligence services with vast amounts of information on the ground.  

(This is related to my civil defense proposal to make western countries more robust, but simply enabling our cell phones to pass text messages on a peer-to-peer basis. To read about much simpler-cruder methods, have a look here.)

Of course, over the long run, we’d rather not let it come to that. Dropping in several million gifts to a nation’s citizens may not be an act of war - I defy anyone to make that case. But it certainly is a pugnacious violation of sovereignty. So is the freezing of a regime’s foreign assets.

From the Washington Post: How the U.S. Treasury Department froze Libyan assets. They expected $100 million, but found over $30 billion -- mostly all in one bank. To put this in perspective: In 2009, Libya had a gross domestic product of $62 billion.

Say what? Thirty billion dollars? If this cash pile is matched by similar revelations re Egypt and Tunisia and other toppled despotisms, can you doubt that economic transparency will become a truly radical cause during the twenty-teens.  Perhaps even as much as I predicted back in 1989, in my novel EARTH?

Only, in this case, we’re talking about a “radicalism of reasonableness.” A militancy of moderation. A fervent and dynamic worldwide call for governments and corporations and oligarchs and rulers and economies and everybody simply to play fair. Compete fair. To rule fairly, the way Adam Smith and F. Hayek and nearly all cogent economists of left and right agree we must, if society is to be healthy at all.

A radicalism that Louis Brandeis spoke of when he prescribed the one thing that keeps a society healthy. “Light is the best disinfectant.”

= The Other Assertion: Light Only Makes us Stronger =

I’ve long-delayed my “WikiLeaks Analysis.” Events are still surging along. But one aspect that Julian Assange surely never expected - when he spilled a quarter of a million State Department cables upon the world - was the degree to which this leak helped Hillary Clinton and her colleagues, at the exact moment when they needed maximum credibility in the developing world, and especially among Arab youth.  The overall positive impression given by those cables -- of skilled American professionals who despised the despots they had to deal with -- overwhelmed all the tiny embarrassments that Assange expected to send heads rolling, in Foggy Bottom.  

The crux effect of this openness (one that I predicted at that 2001 speech, and since then) was to so enhance American influence at a vital moment, that I expect the Secretary of State - if she had a chance - would give Julian Assange a great big hug.

This doesn’t prove assertion #b.  But it is highly indicative.  Indeed, there is only one thing that prevents our skilled professionals, diplomats and political leaders from doing the obvious. From eagerly embracing a broad, general secular trend toward a world with few secrets as the surest way to accomplish their goal -- a “win” for the overall civilization that employs them.

Alas, that one thing is a biggie: human nature.

= An Idea To Further Us Along That Road =

I would have let this rumination end there. But a fan of The Transparent Society sent in this piece of news and I really must share it.

India’s chief economic adviser Kaushik Basu argues that to reduce bribery we should make the paying of bribes (not the demanding!) legal.  

Let’s have a little context here. There are two types of bribery. First comes the kind where the briber and the bribed are in collusion to perpetrate an illegal act. This problem exists worldwide and Basu’s proposal will do nothing about it. In the west, its occurrences are isolated, but extremely severe. Sophisticated schemes of collusion between politicians, corrupt bureaucrats and oligarchs can result in multi billion dollar theft from investors and taxpayers -- and some contend that the last decade has been an especially busy time for such raids. But that’s not the topic here.

Rather, the issue is something that seems rare in the West, but that's endemic across the developing world. It is the sad fact that regular people often have to pay gifts to public officials, just to get them to do their jobs.  To issue a business permit, for example, or a rental agreement, or driver’s license. So, here's the idea:

“Under current law… the bribe giver and the bribe taker become partners in crime. It is in their joint interest to keep this fact hidden from the authorities and to be fugitives from the law, because, if caught, both expect to be punished. Under the kind of revised law that I am proposing here, once a bribe is given and the bribe giver collects whatever she is trying to acquire by giving the money, the interests of the bribe taker and bribe giver become completely orthogonal to each other. If caught, the bribe giver will go scott free and will be able to collect his bribe money back. The bribe taker, on the other hand, loses the booty of bribe and faces a hefty punishment.

“Hence, in the post-bribe situation it is in the interest of the bribe giver to have the bribe taker caught….Since the bribe taker knows this, he will be much less inclined to take the bribe in the first place. This establishes that there will be a drop in the incidence of bribery.

“Basu notes that he intends this to apply to bribes where the person paying the bribe is receiving only what they are entitled to receive, e.g. when you have to bribe to get a business license that you are entitled to or to get your rice rations or get an income tax refund."

This is  a bit of brilliance, on a scale with Hernando de Soto’s scheme that has worked so well, in Peru, vesting property rights in poor farmers so that they can then use capitalist processes for their own benefit.  Moreover -- need I add -- it is a pure and magnificent example of the cleansing, healthy power of transparency.

= Final Note ==

Now, in closing, let me give you your your assignment till next time. Consider. If we find a solution to bribery, what about its vastly worse twin... BLACKMAIL?

Read this. Ponder it. Spread the word and make every public official... every person who ever THINKS about seeking public office... think about it in depth.  

It may be too late.  Then again, perhaps it isn't.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (17+ / 0-)

    Things to repeat: "CITOKATE -- Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote to Error." "IAAMOAC -- I Am A Member of a Civilization"

    by David Brin on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 11:12:47 PM PDT

  •  Apologies for the change in type face. (9+ / 0-)

    Nothing I tried fixed it. I find this a very twitchy site, alas.


     With cordial regards,

    David Brin

    Things to repeat: "CITOKATE -- Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote to Error." "IAAMOAC -- I Am A Member of a Civilization"

    by David Brin on Fri Apr 01, 2011 at 11:14:36 PM PDT

  •  You have my buy-in on this (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maybeeso in michigan, linkage

    It's hard to corrupt the entire internet, which is about as Jeffersonian an institution as it gets.

    My belief is that the internet is responsible for current coups against North African dictators, who ruled for decades back when the people had no way to know what they were actually doing.

    Obama's got a big rural broadband project underway.  Maybe there's no real surprise to learn that the Republican / Tea Bagger cabal is doing everything possible to de-fund it.

    Fuck with the truth at your own peril. - Anonymous

    by thenekkidtruth on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 04:21:05 AM PDT

  •  Absolutely, it is a fundamental human right (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    maybeeso in michigan

    just like guns are.

    And it's been this way for 500,000 years since we split from our Neanderthal predecessors . . .

  •  I remember after Katrina there were people (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    who couldn't use their cell phones for voice but could do text messages.   There was an explanation, but I couldn't get past the first few sentences.  

    I was watching closely because my daughter had  left NOLA at the very last moment and I hadn't heard from her.   She didn't think of texting right away.    There is a huge difference between then and now---given the way things work now, texting would likely have been her first thought.

    Anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices. ~Voltaire from La Feminista

    by maybeeso in michigan on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 08:36:32 AM PDT

  •  The Shockwave Rider (0+ / 0-)

    Still one of the best books ever written on the importance of the flow of information is "The Shockwave Rider" by John Brunner. Written in 1975, it anticipated so much of what came about with the creation of the internet, it's uncanny. One can only imagine what wikileaks would be doing if they had Nicholas Halfinger working on their side.

    The dystopian future in the book seems a little too prophetic; a highly stratified society with an elite overclass, great wealth and power at the top while the rest do without, secrets on top of secrets and a corrupt media dispensing trivialities...

    It would be fascinating to see how the proposals put up for a vote at the end of the book would hold up today.

    "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

    by xaxnar on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 10:31:20 AM PDT

    •  Brunner was great... but see also my own,,, (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      ,,,novel EARTH which predicted the Web and dozens of other things that came true!

      Things to repeat: "CITOKATE -- Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote to Error." "IAAMOAC -- I Am A Member of a Civilization"

      by David Brin on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 11:43:36 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Haven't read that one, but... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        ...still remember an article you had back in Wired in which you pretty much said we could all kiss privacy good bye. The only question was, who would control the cameras.

        "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

        by xaxnar on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 03:49:31 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Oops... but meanwhile (0+ / 0-)

          I see that's the one you linked to at the start of this, but I seem to remember another along the same lines, but a bit darker.

          The blackmail question is a bit harder; we already have a media machine in place and operating quite effectively to take any thing someone has said, pull it out of context and put it in a frame where it can end their careers.  James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart's nasty dirty tricks are pretty amateurish compared to what can be done.

          Given the way things are going, we may all end up needing some way to record what we do all the time in self defense - each of us having our own personal data archive to fall back on when charges are leveled or facts are disputed.

          Not that that's always going to be infallible either. I'm getting to the age where what I hear is not always what was said. Playing back the tape could be embarrassing at best, mortifying at worst.

          And then there's the sabotage scenario. I'm thinking of the episode of Star Trek TOS where Kirk was court martialed for jettisoning a pod before the person in it could return to the Enterprise; the ship's recordings showed him pushing the wrong button at the critical moment. How many of us would be able to cope with a skillfully faked record?

          "No special skill, no standard attitude, no technology, and no organization - no matter how valuable - can safely replace thought itself."

          by xaxnar on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 04:08:45 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  I say transparency can PRESERVE some privacy...but (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            ...but only a little.  That little is precious though. And we'll only have it if we can catch the peeping toms. If WE can see.

            Great TOS episode!

            Things to repeat: "CITOKATE -- Criticism Is The Only Known Antidote to Error." "IAAMOAC -- I Am A Member of a Civilization"

            by David Brin on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 04:31:27 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  Thank You - N/T (0+ / 0-)

    "Upward, not Northward" - Flatland, by EA Abbott

    by linkage on Sat Apr 02, 2011 at 07:18:39 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site