Questions and concerns over China’s stringent control of internet access has long been an issue of concern for Human Rights organizations and often come under attack from other countries. Indeed, the monitoring and restricting of internet traffic (especially traffic directed outside the territory of China) is not a new phenomenon since the birth of the Internet in China, nor is the high level of state sanctioned censorship. The following paper explores whether China’s state legitimacy is being challenged through the relatively new medium of the internet. To these ends the following paper focuses on some of the methods by which the Chinese government is restricting access to what it considers politically ‘dangerous’ sites, with the instances where the internet has provided the people of China with a voice and platform for political discussion.
The article by Fallowsmar provides an overview of some of the methods employed by the Chinese government in their control of the internet; for example, it is common practice to heavily restrict access to foreign sites through a black list of search terms and physical addresses of internet sites (Fallowsmar). Indeed, Fallowsmar discusses physical restriction of internet access in China in the designed ‘choke points’; given the size of China and the number of internet users it comes at some surprise that there are only three physical links (fiber optic cables), that allow traffic out of the country (Fallowsmar). Furthermore these choke points are monitored by mirroring software which can identify what a user is accessing (Fallowsmar).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"How Is State Legitimacy Contested On China’s Internet Today?".
At the same time, the censorship of the Internet in China has not managed to quell all the voices of the people. Focusing on the blogosphere in China, Leibold’s article questions whether the predictions of the west in relation to the internet (as a force for ‘revolution’ in countries it considered oppressed) is the only outcome or result that flows from a free and open internet (Leibold). Indeed, in determining whether or not the Internet in China is questioning state legitimacy it is necessary to escape from the common western perspective that the free and open internet automatically promotes the core values and underlying ideology of capitalist countries, as Leibold notes: “isn’t it a bit premature, if not naïve, to posit that the internet is gradually subverting party-state hegemony or promoting a new kind of deliberative public sphere in China?” (Leibold 14). Thus, Leibold makes the point that assessing whether the Chinese state or online activists are ‘winning’ or not, fails to take into account the broad spectrum of online citizens. While it is clear that Chinese citizens have a greater access to the internet (despite it being heavily regulated), it is possible this new bread on online citizenship will not fall into the traditional categories of online activist.
Yang’s chapter entitled ‘Online Activism in the Age of Contention’ also explores the recent development in online activism and the new form of online citizen activism. While Yang insists censorship still dominates the internet in China, the ability to form groups online (even groups with no political agenda) have allowed a new voice for the Chinese people. Thus for Yang, the Internet in China as a platform for activism but in a markedly different way than previous acts of protest that have occurred in China in the past: “China’s new citizen activism marks some significant differences from the past […] it happens more frequently, involves a broader range of issues, has a broader social base” (Yang 42).
In contrast, Thornton article highlights how while the use of the Internet in China is still heavily regulated, it has been used by many netizen’s (citizens of the internet) to expose corruption practices of Chinese officials (Thornton). Indeed, at the heart of Thornton’s article is the idea that while it remains true that the Chinese government still maintain a high level of censorship over the Internet through a variety of laws, at the same time the access to the internet and information has helped foster online groups of citizens that have exposed corruption; as Thornton states internet censorship has: “been both more exclusive and more internally heterogeneous than some have imagined” (Thornton 280). Indeed, there have been many examples of ‘flesh hunting’ (exposing individuals through blogs and the internet), which has led to identifying corruption within the Chinese government.
In conclusion it seems likely China will maintain a tight grasp on censorship and continue to crackdown on cyber dissidents. As Thornton notes, not only does the Chinese government employ around 30,000 ‘cyber cops’ to monitor, delete and identify posts and discussions which cut against the party line, but also have begun setting online ‘honey traps’, seemingly a way to circumnavigate the censorship protocols for individuals, while in fact all the data sent and received is recorded by the Chinese government. While ‘The Great firewall of China’ is seen by the Western world as circumnavigating individual’s freedom of expression, it is questionable whether the Chinese model and use of the internet will adhere to western ideals. What is apparent is the fact the activism that is facilitated by the China’s internet is not naturally opposed to the state; instead, it can be seen as a social movement that is directing certain policies and rooting out corruption. As a final note, the debate over China’s monitoring and restricting of individuals online activity has been silenced somewhat following the recent revelations concerning the NSA’s mass surveillance operation; perhaps prior to criticizing China’s model, the Western governments use of the internet should be held to account.
- Fallowsmar, James. “The Connection Has Been Reset: China’s Great Firewall is crude, slapdash, and surprisingly easy to breach. Here’s why it’s so effective anyway. The Atlantic. March 1st 2008.
- Leibold, James. “Blogging Alone: China, the Internet, and the Democratic Illusion?.” The Journal of Asian Studies 70.4 (2011): 1023-1041.
- Thornton, Patricia M. “Censorship and surveillance in Chinese cyberspace: Beyond the Great Firewall.” Chinese politics: State, society and the market(2010): 179-198.
- Yang, Guobin. The power of the Internet in China: Citizen activism online. Columbia University Press, 2009.
