scholarly journals The Future of Biometrics and Liberal Democracy

2021 ◽  
pp. 79-95
Author(s):  
Marcus Smith ◽  
Seumas Miller
Keyword(s):  
New Technologies ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
General Terms ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
Key Features ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThe first part of this chapter considers future biometrics, with a focus on second generation biometrics that measure physiological patterns. The second discusses the potential biometric future – how the use of biometrics, data and algorithms more broadly, could be used by governments to regulate social and economic interactions. This discussion will draw on the development of credit systems, from those used in commercial online platforms to rate the performance of providers and users, to the more integrated and all-encompassing social credit system (SCS) implemented in China, as an example of a potential future development in liberal democratic countries. Finally, we discuss the key features of liberal democratic theory and how biometric and related technological developments may change governance in western democracies. While we briefly mention some relevant developments in the private sector, our main focus will be on the relationship between liberal democratic governments and their security agencies, on the one hand, and their citizenry, on the other. We describe in general terms how liberal democracies might respond to these new technologies in a manner that preserves their benefits without unduly compromising established liberal democratic institutions, principles and values. Accordingly, we seek to offer a response to some of the dual use ethical dilemmas posed by biometrics, albeit in general terms.

INNOVATIVE SOCIETY: A SOCIAL CREDIT SYSTEM IN CHINA

2020 ◽  
pp. 50-59
Author(s):  
Weichzhen` Gao
Keyword(s):  
Latin American ◽  
Social Life ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Educational Mission ◽  
Social Transformations ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Road Project ◽  
Patterns Of Behavior ◽  
The One ◽  
And Behavior

The basic principles of SCS implementation are as follows: Formation of sustainable social structure and its operational management; Monitoring and correction of social transformations and behavior of the general population: transparency as a major factor in the life of an innovative society; Stimulating competition as a motivation for success. Due to the transparency of social life, different patterns of behavior in different conditions are published in the information space of the society. Accordingly, actionable life scenarios are made available to the general public, which is fulfilling an educational mission regarding adaptation mechanisms in an innovative society; the SCS system is a significant component of the national strategy of integration and consolidation of the Chinese innovation society; carrying out softpolicy foreign policy: The positive experience of the Chinese innovation society in implementing SCS is a prerequisite for expanding its area of application in Asian, African and Latin American countries, especially the countries participating in the One Belt One Road project. SCS covers all spheres of social life of the modern Chinese citizen, forms a sustainable form of accountability to the society for the content and flow of their daily activities, aspirations and preferences.

scholarly journals From Bulletin Boards to Big Data

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-62
Author(s):  
Christian Göbel ◽  
Jie Li
Keyword(s):  
Big Data ◽  
New Technologies ◽  
Central Government ◽  
Developmental Trajectory ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Feedback Systems ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Bulletin Boards ◽  
Local Decision ◽  
Set Up

Why do Chinese governments at various levels set up public complaint websites where citizen petitions and government responses can be reviewed by the general public? We argue that it is the result of two factors: strong signals sent by the central government to improve governance, and the availability of new technologies to promote policy innovation. To impress their superiors, local officials adopted newly available commercial technology to innovate existing citizen feedback systems, which presented a developmental trajectory from “openness,” “integration,” to “big data-driven prediction.” Drawing on policy documents and interviews with local politicians and administrators, we provide a chronological perspective of how technical development, central government’s signals and local decision-making have interacted in the past two decades to bring forth today’s public complaint websites. The contingent and non-teleological nature of this development can also be applied to other policies such as the social credit system.

Group-Differentiated Rights and the Liberal Democratic State: Rethinking the Headscarf Controversy in Turkey

2001 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
pp. 31-46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yeşim Arat
Keyword(s):  
Minority Groups ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
The Past ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Democratic State ◽  
Clifford Geertz ◽  
Ethnocultural Groups ◽  
Special Rights ◽  
The Relationship

The development of liberalism with both the courage and the capacity to engage itself with a different world, one in which its principles are neither well understood nor widely held, in which indeed it is, in most places, a minority creed, alien and suspect, is not only possible, it is necessary.-Clifford Geertz. 2000.Available Light.Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, p. 258.Over the past two decades, the debate over multiculturalism challenged the justice of neutral, “difference blind” rules in liberal democracies. Allegedly neutral institutions were shown to be implicitly biased toward the priorities, experiences, or interests of the dominant groups in the society. Criticism of difference-blind rules and claims for justice to minority groups defined the relationship between government and opposition in many contexts. Arguments for special rights to protect minorities, women, or ethnocultural groups gained legitimacy (Young 1990, Jones 1990, Phillips 1991, Taylor 1994, Kymlicka 1995, Kymlicka and Norman 2000).

HIGHER EDUCATION FOR HAREDIM IN ISRAEL

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 273-283
Author(s):  
Tova Hartman ◽  
Chaim Zicherman
Keyword(s):  
Higher Education ◽  
Charles Taylor ◽  
Gender Segregation ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Adequate Education ◽  
The Right ◽  
Relationship Of ◽  
The Relationship ◽  
Intense Debate

AbstractOver the past two decades a number of Israeli institutions of higher education have opened gender-segregated programs for the ultra-Orthodox, or haredim. The growth of these programs has generated an intense debate in Israel, reflected throughout Israeli media and in several appeals to Israel's Supreme Court. The issues raised concerning gender-segregated higher education reflect an overarching inquiry that is of great interest to multicultural theoreticians: the relationship of liberal democracies to their illiberal minorities. Multicultural theoreticians agree that healthy democracies must tolerate some illiberal practices while acknowledging that not every illiberal practice can be tolerated. In the case at hand, the essay addresses the question: can a liberal democracy tolerate gender-segregated higher education? Using work by Charles Taylor, Michael Walzer, Kwame Anthony Appiah, John Inazu, and others, the essay reviews the arguments for and against gender segregation in higher education for Israeli haredim. The essay explores the limits of toleration of illiberal cultures within liberal democratic societies and finds crucial the right to exit such a culture—a right whose viability is dependent upon adequate education. The essay concludes by discussing the multiculturalism organization development model and what has been termed the manyness and messiness of multiculturalism.

Liberal Democracy: One Form or Many?

1992 ◽  
Vol 40 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. 130-145 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Ware
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracy ◽  
Cultural Context ◽  
American Exceptionalism ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Subsequent Section ◽  
The One

This article examines whether there are significant differences between liberal democracies which warrant them being classified as different forms of democracy. The article begins by outlining six features of liberal democracy which are crucial in understanding how this type of government works. The subsequent section examines the origins of liberal democracy and considers the relevance of arguments derived from American ‘exceptionalism’. Attention is then focused on liberal democratic governments today – by reference to Lijphart's distinction between ‘majoritarian’ and ‘consensus' democracies. Finally, the article looks at whether the form of liberal democracy is changed substantially when it is transplanted into a cultural context different from the one in which it originated. The general conclusion is that there is no case for identifying different forms of liberal democracy.

TRANSVERSAL SUBJECTIVITY IN THE DIMENSIONS OF VIRTUAL REALITY

2020 ◽  
pp. 7-22
Author(s):  
Olena Yatsenko
Keyword(s):  
Virtual Reality ◽  
High Tech ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Self Presentation ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Modern Development ◽  
Wide Range ◽  
Big Data Technologies ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The One

The modern development of technologies, both mass media and virtual reality, declare the mobility of the boundaries of private and public life. This fact proves the existence of a significant number of social networks, branding and image technologies, biometrics, and profiling of employees of high-tech corporations, big data technologies, cookies, and the Social Credit System in China. The scale of this phenomenon is explained by the collision of two trends which are oriented against each other: on the one hand, subjectivity seeks to maximize expression and self-presentation in cyberspace, and on the other hand, stakeholders, guided by economic, political, religious, and other motives use published information for pragmatic influence on subjectivity, first of all, manipulative one. The strategy of the morality of the virtual world provides a wide range of assessments: from identification with the Stoic principles of ataraxia and autarky to the accusations of irresponsibility, impersonality and escapism. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to define the modern type of actualization and representation of subjectivity as transversal, i. e. complex, contradictory, integrative and motivated by certain intentions and aspirations of the person.

The State and Digital Society in China: Big Brother Xi is Watching You!

2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (01) ◽  
pp. 2040003
Author(s):  
JEAN-PIERRE CABESTAN
Keyword(s):  
New Technologies ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Developed Countries ◽  
Chinese Society ◽  
Surveillance Systems ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Big Brother ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Privacy Breaches ◽  
And Control

There is no question that China is ahead of many developed countries in the digitalization of both its society and surveillance systems. It is also clear that the new technologies made possible by this digitalization — the widespread use of smart ID cards, the Great Firewall, the accumulation of Big Data, the social credit system (SCS) and facial recognition — have enhanced the capacity of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to rule China, maintain control over society and stay in power indefinitely. While these are not the only systems in place to manage and control Chinese citizens and this is not their sole purpose, these developments have been rightly seen as part of an ambitious Orwellian project to micromanage and microcontrol every aspect of Chinese society. To better comprehend the significance of this new phenomenon, this paper employs Michel Foucault’s “Panopticon” metaphor, the perfect mean of surveillance and discipline as well as an “apparatus of power.” Yet, these new technologies have their own limits. In real life there is no perfect Panopticon as no society, even the most controlled one, is a sealed prison. Censorship on the Web is erratic and the full implementation of the SCS is likely to be postponed beyond 2020 for both technical and political reasons, as more Chinese citizens have raised concerns about unchecked data collection and privacy breaches. As a result, China is probably heading toward a somewhat fragmented digitalized society and surveillance system that is more repressive in some localities and more flexible in others, as is the case with the Chinese bureaucracy in general.

scholarly journals We’re just data: Exploring China’s social credit system in relation to digital platform ratings cultures in Westernised democracies

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. 220-232 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen Li Xan Wong ◽  
Amy Shields Dobson
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Interpersonal Relationships ◽  
Economic Life ◽  
Credit System ◽  
Political Activities ◽  
Credit Score ◽  
Social Credit ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
Nation States ◽  
The Government

Social media platforms and apps have become increasingly important tools for governance and the centralisation of information in many nation states around the globe. In China, the government is currently piloting a social credit system in several cities in an ambitious attempt to merge a financial credit score system with a broader quantification of social and civic integrity for all citizens and corporations. China has already begun to experiment with metrics and quantification of the value and virtue of its citizens, going beyond the function of measuring workplace performance and health-related self-tracking to measuring one’s purchasing and consumption history, interpersonal relationships, political activities, as well as the tracking of one’s location history. China has also already begun to apply a reward and punishment system that rewards those who comply with the Chinese government’s ideals and punishes those who deviate from them. Although there are no such ambitiously unified systems currently proposed in Western liberal democratic countries, some aligned structures and cultures of social media use are already well in place. This article seeks to offer a comparative examination of the structures and cultures of China’s social credit system with those which are already present and in place in Western liberal democratic countries. While it may be convenient to digitise everyday social, political and economic life, China’s social credit system brings about a vision of what may be to come, should democratic countries continue to do so without stricter data use policies in place.

scholarly journals A sociedade do conhecimento e o humanismo | The knowledge society and humanism

2015 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mauro Lúcio Leitão Condé
Keyword(s):  
Science And Technology ◽  
Knowledge Society ◽  
Sufficient Conditions ◽  
A Value ◽  
Science Technology ◽  
Human Autonomy ◽  
Human Ethics ◽  
Technological Developments ◽  
The One ◽  
The Relationship

RESUMO Este artigo aborda aspectos epistemológicos das relações entre ciência, tecnologia e humanismo na era da informação, aqui chamada de “sociedade do conhecimento”. Seu pressuposto fundamental é de que existe um desenvolvimento simultâneo entre conhecimento científico e tecnológico, por um lado, e humanismo, por outro. Contudo, essa relação não é paralela. O humanismo opera de modo transversal à ciência e à tecnologia. Na medida em que a ciência e a tecnologia não têm um valor em si, mas nos seus usos, elas podem tanto ser instrumentos que impeçam a autonomia humana quanto, ao contrário, facilitadoras dessa autonomia. Na sociedade do conhecimento, o desenvolvimento científico e tecnológico é “condição necessária” para a emergência do humanismo – ou pelo menos do tipo de humanismo aí engendrado –, mas não é “condição suficiente”. Este artigo procura, assim, mostrar que a simultaneidade e a transversalidade entre conhecimento e humanismo, nesse modelo de sociedade, sugerem que essa relação comporte necessariamente uma perspectiva epistemológica, isto é, existe uma pressuposição epistemológica na própria condição ética humana. Somos seres éticos porque conhecemos, ainda que o ato de conhecer não nos torne, necessariamente, seres éticos.Palavras-chave: Humanismo; Sociedade do Conhecimento; Epistemologia.ABSTRACT The paper discusses epistemological aspects of the relationship among science, technology and humanism in the era of information, here called society of knowledge. The fundamental assumption is that there is a simultaneous development of scientific and technological knowledge, on the one hand, and humanism, on the other. However, this relationship is not parallel. Humanism operates transversely to science and technology. To the extent that science and technology do not have a value in themselves, but in their uses, so can they be instruments to avoid human autonomy as, on the contrary, facilitate this autonomy. In the society of knowledge, scientific and technological developments are “necessary conditions” for the emergence of humanism – or at least the kind of humanism engendered within it – , but they are not “sufficient conditions”. The paper attempts to show that the simultaneity and the transversality intersections between knowledge and humanism in this model of society suggest that this relationship necessarily includes an epistemological perspective, that is, there is an epistemological assumption in the human ethics condition itself. We are ethical beings because we know, although the act of knowing does not make us necessarily ethical beings.Keywords: Humanism; Society of Knowledge; Epistemology.

‘Dethroning Politics’: Liberalism, Constitutionalism and Democracy in the Thought of F. A. Hayek

1994 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard Bellamy
Keyword(s):  
Separation Of Powers ◽  
Bill Of Rights ◽  
Popular Participation ◽  
The Rule Of Law ◽  
Liberal Democratic ◽  
The One ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Higher Law ◽  
The Relationship

The relationship between liberalism and democracy is notoriously paradoxical. On the one hand, the justification for democratic procedures most commonly rests on liberal assumptions. Standard liberal arguments for democracy range from the importance of consent due to the moral primacy of the individual, to the role of critical argument and the diversity of opinion for the discovery of truth. On the other hand, liberal institutional arrangements, such as the separation of powers and the rule of law, have frequently been interpreted as constraints upon democracy, albeit necessary ones if democracy is not to undermine itself. The paradox arises from the fact that liberalism provides a philosophical basis for regarding democracy as the only valid source of law whilst apparently appealing to some higher law in order to limit democracy itself. This paradox is embodied in the constitutions of most liberal democratic states. For generally these documents contain provisions – such as a bill of rights guaranteeing the freedoms of speech, assembly and association – designed to secure popular participation in the democratic process, alongside others – such as rights not obviously intrinsic to democratic decision making and mechanisms for judicial review – which seek to limit the power of democratic assemblies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document