The Latest Charge to Free Speech
Yesterday in Slate, Anne Applebaum gave recognition to Hillary Clinton’s latest endorsement of promoting “civil society.” This past week at the 10th-anniversary meeting of the Community of Democracies, Clinton spoke of the endangered state of free speech and thought in modern “democracies” such as Egypt, Burma, and Zimbabwe.
“[Democracy promotion] has also been unfairly discredited by the invasion of Iraq, a decision too often remembered as nothing more than a foolish “war for democracy” that went predictably wrong. The subsequent failure of Iraq to metamorphose overnight into the Switzerland of the Middle East is cited as an example of why democracy should never be pushed or promoted anywhere at all. This silly argument has had a strong echo: Since becoming president, Barack Obama has shied away from the word democracy in foreign contexts—he prefers “our common security and prosperity”—as if it might be some dangerous Bushism. In fact, democracy promotion was not invented by a secret cabal of neocons; it is a long-standing tool of bipartisan American, as well as Western, foreign policy, one that has overlapped at times with both public diplomacy and foreign aid.”
In January, Hillary Clinton announced unrestricted internet access as a top policy priority. Roughly 30% of the world lives in countries that censor the internet – something I cannot fathom. I certainly hope that Ms. Clinton fulfills her promise, particularly when I consider the youth in Iran.
According to Abbas Maroufi, the youth in Iran are one step ahead of the Secretary. Maroufi, the exiled Iranian author of several controversial novels, explained to my class in December that many students at leading Iranian Universities have continually outsmarted the firewalls that their country spends an egregious amount of money constructing. AccessNow.org already plays a significant role in this discussion as a group that helps videos and communications get past Iranian Internet barricades. This is because opposition groups in oppressive regimes find their greatest success through sharing information. In many cases, totalitarian regimes operate through an intricate network of lies and coercement. (See also: The Stasi, KGB, North Korea…) This is not usually possible if there is contrasting evidence that is found to be more legitimate or credible. The democratic Western way of living is probably more appealing when it’s portrayal is not perverted and monopolized by a megalomaniac religious zealot.
I have been told by Mr. Maroufi that the youth of Iran is willing and eager to abandon the destructive dictatorship they have been raised under. Access to knowledge of history and translations in Farsi to guides to nonviolent change like Gene Sharp’s “From Dictatorship to Democracy” could go a long way in the hands of charismatic youths. It should be our goal to find out.