five page essay

Fan 1

Menghuan Fan

Eng 100 section LL

Paper 3 rough draft

March, 23rd

Political Activism and Technology

Impacts of technology on society has been a controversial debate for the last decades.

While some people think that the rise in technology may significantly affect human existence,

techno-optimists hold onto the belief that technological advancement has a promising future to

the entire humanity. Ian Bremmer discusses in his article, “Democracy in Cyberspace: What

Technology Can and Cannot Do for Us” on the role of technology in democratizing nations and

the way the world is changing the internet. Besides, Malcolm Gladwell, in his article titled

“Small Change,” argued on how social media can bring about significant social change. Al-

though the use of social media has elevated communication, it has not been successful in bring-

ing people in society together. Technology serves the two purposes of bringing people together

and also causing isolation. For instance, people staying miles away from each other can connect

through video calls. On the other hand, people seated together can be isolated from each other if

everyone concentrates on their phones without holding conversations. Bremmer’s argument on

how technology promotes democracy supports the idea of Gladwell that social media is not an

enemy of the status quo.

Technological advancement has promoted freedom because it has enabled people to com-

municate instantly with each other anywhere across the world. According to Bremmer, “As ad-

Fan 2

vances in communications technology -- cellular telephones, text messaging, the Internet, social

networking allow an ever-widening circle of people to easily and inexpensively share ideas and

aspirations, technology will break down barriers between peoples and nations”(86). Technology

not only allows people to communicate easily and in a recreational manner but also to connect

with their colleagues, friends or relatives who are separated by miles. Besides, social media has

received too much credit from the digital evangelists and techno-optimists for the effects it has

on society. Likewise, Gladwell seconds that “With Facebook and Twitter and the like, the tradi-

tional relationship between political authority and popular will has been upended, making it easi-

er for the powerless to collaborate, coordinate, and give voice to their concerns”(2). People used

to can only watch the governments to do their things and accept their decisions. And now have a

place to share their ideas and speak out their concerns.This implies that people with the same

views collaborate in social media and share their comments before voicing their opinions.

Even though technology cannot create a social change desire, it promotes the process

where there is a desire for change. Political activism is more effective when carried out physical-

ly rather than in social media that only creates a satisfaction of participating while in reality, it is

more of spectating than participating. Even though social media facilitates communication, it

cannot help in the protest against authoritarianism or the fight for democracy. When people meet

physically, they give each other adequate support and generate morale within the group where

everyone will be willing to protest and make sacrifices for democracy. Unluckily, only a few

people are willing to participate in such exercises. However, in social media, many people feel it

is easy to participate because the only requirement for them is to join an online group. Accord-

ing to Bremmer, “If technology has helped citizens pressure authoritarian governments in several

Fan 3

countries, it is not because the technology created a demand for change. That demand must come

from public anger at authoritarianism itself” (89). In this statement, it is evident that democracy

does not strongly correlate with technology. It only happened that way because currently, tech-

nology is widely embraced in democratic regions. Social media reemphasizes social norms but

does not change the status quo. Additionally, Gladwell highlights that “the sit-in spread to those

cities which had preexisting ‘movement centers’—a core of dedicated and trained activists ready

to turn the ‘fever’ into action.”(8). These “sit-ins” spread to regions that were ready to act and

likewise, democracy will only reach to places that desire for change. Thus, the ideas of freedom

cannot be planted by freedom, but they come from within. Technology and social media are

rarely used in spreading democratic views to places where there is no pursuit for change by peo-

ple. In simple terms, technology helps in promoting but does not create social change. People are

interested in what entertains them and are less concerned with how they are governed.

The spread of democracy across the world depends on the concern of the majority of the

people. Likewise, technology will be useful in bringing change depending on how people utilize

it and the priorities of those in power. Bremmer points out that “they are a megaphone, and have

a multiplier effect, but they serve both those who want to speed up the cross border flow of in-

formation and those who want to divert or manipulate it”(88). The technological advancement is

like a double-edged sword as it allows people to communicate effectively irrespective of their

distances apart, and at the same time, the government monitors information shared and may ma-

nipulate them. Besides, the impact of technology relies on those who are in control of it; thus,

political activism that seeks to challenge the status quo should be strong. Although everyone is

entitled to the right to privacy, the companies often infringe these rights because they are after

Fan 4

profit. This notion is validated by Bremmer when he argues that the BlackBerry technology

company depicts some of the organizations that seek to protect their market shares by carrying

out some business deals that help the authoritarian governments to spy on its people (91). Black-

Berry company has shown that it is not ready to spread democratic ideals of freedom and equali-

ty because if it was the case, it could not allow the authoritarian governments to monitor the

moves of its citizens. Their faint-hearted behavior and concern for profits made it easy for the

authoritarian governments to manipulate it. Gladwell refutes the claims made by Mark Pfeifle

that “Without Twitter the people of Iran would not have felt empowered and confident to stand

up for freedom and democracy”(Gladwell, 2). This notion implies that Iranians protested against

communism mainly due to social media influence. Though the whole event was covered up

through tweets, most of them came from the people in the West who were merely speculating

and not taking anything productive towards the cause. Therefore, social media has played a role

in social activism, but it is not as influential and powerful as people try to put it.

The whole idea of technology is to make life easier in various ways. Technological ad-

vancement has been a breakthrough in communication, especially in connecting people from

great distances. Additionally, the use of media has seemed to be a medium of challenging status

quo and promote equality and freedom. However, the role of technology in social activism is

overhyped. As stated by Bremmer and Gladwell in their articles, social media does not create

democratic views, but it facilitates the development of these views where people desire democra-

cy. In contrary, authoritarian governments have misused technology by using it to spy and ma-

nipulate their citizens. Fostering freedom and equality across the globe does not require faint-

hearted people but rather need discipline, coordination and support. The status quo can be chal-

Fan 5

lenged through a desire of the majority to create change coupled up with a significant motivation.

Social media alone cannot create the change that is deserved because of its “weak ties.” There-

fore, the “strong ties” and “weak ties” of social media and technology guides on how effectively

these platforms can be integrated with the search for freedom and equality as stated by the au-

thors, Bremmer and Gladwell.