Internet Censorship in Liberal Democracies: Learning from Autocracies?

2017 ◽  
pp. 11-28
Author(s):  
Andreas Busch ◽  
Patrick Theiner ◽  
Yana Breindl
Keyword(s):  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Internet Censorship

scholarly journals The Page You Are Attempting to Access Has Been Blocked in Accordance with National Laws: Applying a Corporate Responsibility Framework to Human Rights Issues Facing Internet Companies

2011 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily C. Miletello
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Corporate Responsibility ◽  
Child Pornography ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
User Data ◽  
The Government ◽  
Internet Censorship ◽  
Protecting Intellectual Property ◽  
Rights Issues ◽  
Internet Companies

According to the OpenNet Intiative, at least 40 countries engage in some degree of Internet censorship. 1 While censorship may be considered justifiable for various reasons—including national security, blocking child pornography, or protecting intellectual property—some authoritative states, most notably China, censor the Internet in order to control the activities of political dissidents, international human rights groups, or those who may be otherwise critical of the government. Potentially more troubling, both authoritative nations and liberal democracies alike frequently request  user-data information from Internet companies, which may infringe on individual rights to privacy and free speech, and may even lead to arbitrary detention and torture.

Kantian Project of Perpetual Peace in the Context of Modern Ethical and Political Concepts of War

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 85-100
Author(s):  
Arseniy D. Kumankov
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
French Revolution ◽  
Just War ◽  
Just War Theory ◽  
Historical Background ◽  
Democratic Peace ◽  
Peace Treaty ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Democratic Peace Theory ◽  
Perpetual Peace

The article considers the modern meaning of Kant’s doctrine of war. The author examines the context and content of the key provisions of Kant’s concept of perpetual peace. The author also reviews the ideological affinity between Kant and previous authors who proposed to build alliances of states as a means of preventing wars. It is noted that the French revolution and the wars caused by it, the peace treaty between France and Prussia served as the historical background for the conceptualization of Kant’s project. In the second half of the 20th century, there is a growing attention to Kant’s ethical and political philosophy. Theorists of a wide variety of political and ethical schools, (cosmopolitanism, internationalism, and liberalism) pay attention to Kant’s legacy and relate their own concepts to it. Kant’s idea of war is reconsidered by Michael Doyle, Jürgen Habermas, Ulrich Beck, Mary Kaldor, Brian Orend. Thus, Doyle tracks democratic peace theory back to Kant’s idea of the spread of republicanism. According to democratic peace theory, liberal democracies do not solve conflict among themselves by non-military methods. Habermas, Beck, Kaldor appreciate Kant as a key proponent of cosmopolitanism. For them, Kant’s project is important due to notion of supranational forms of cooperation. They share an understanding that peace will be promoted by an allied authority, which will be “governing without government” and will take responsibility for the functioning of the principles of pacification of international relations. Orend’s proves that Kant should be considered as a proponent of the just war theory. In addition, Orend develops a new area in just war theory – the concept of ius post bellum – and justifies regime change as the goal of just war.

Social Norms, Choice, and Work

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christie Hartley
Keyword(s):  
Labor Market ◽  
Social Norms ◽  
Division Of Labor ◽  
Family Life ◽  
Work And Family ◽  
Personal Relationships ◽  
The Political ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Men And Women ◽  
Gendered Division Of Labor

In modern liberal democracies, the gendered division of labor is partially the result of men and women making different choices about work and family life, even if such choices stem from social norms about gender. The choices that women make relative to men’s disadvantage them in various ways: such choices lead them to earn less, enjoy less power and prestige in the labor market, be less able to participate in the political sphere on an equal basis, make them to some degree financially dependent on others, and leave them at a bargaining disadvantage and vulnerable in certain personal relationships. This chapter considers if and when the state should intervene to address women’s disadvantage and inequalities that are the result of gender specialization. It is argued that political liberals can and sometimes must intervene in the gendered division of labor when persons’ interests as free and equal citizens are frustrated.

Sovereignty

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hermann Heller
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Political Theory ◽  
Weimar Republic ◽  
Political System ◽  
Popular Sovereignty ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
National Sovereignty ◽  
Nation States ◽  
The People ◽  
Pluralistic World

This 1927 work addresses the paradox of sovereignty, that is, how the sovereign can be both the highest authority and subject to law. Unlike Kelsen and Schmitt who seek to dissolve the paradox, this text sees the tensions that the paradox highlights as an essential part of a society ruled by law. Sovereignty, in the sense of national sovereignty, is often perceived in liberal democracies today as being under threat, or at least “in transition,” as power devolves from nation states to international bodies. This threat to national sovereignty is at the same time considered a threat to a different idea of sovereignty, popular sovereignty—the sovereignty of “the people”—as important decisions seem increasingly to be made by institutions outside of a country’s political system or by elite-dominated institutions within. This text was written in 1927 amidst the very similar tensions of the Weimar Republic. In an exploration of history, constitutional and political theory, and international law, it shows that democrats must defend a legal idea of sovereignty suitable for a pluralistic world.

Sedition in Liberal Democracies

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anushka Singh
Keyword(s):  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Legal Protection ◽  
Community Based ◽  
Political Speech ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Indian Experience ◽  
Judicial Discourse ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Government ◽  
The Right

Liberal democracies claim to give constitutional and legal protection of varying degrees to the right to free speech of which political speech and the right to dissent are extensions. Within the right to freedom of expression, however, some category of speeches do not enjoy protection as they are believed to be ‘injurious’ to society. One such unprotected form of political speech is sedition which is criminalized for the repercussions it may have on the authority of the government and the state. The cases registered in India in recent months under the law against sedition show that the law in its wide and diverse deployment was used against agitators in a community-based pro-reservation movement, a group of university students for their alleged ‘anti-national’ statements, anti-liquor activists, to name a few. Set against its contemporary use, this book has used sedition as a lens to probe the fate of political speech in liberal democracies. The work is done in a comparative framework keeping the Indian experience as its focus, bringing in inferences from England, USA, and Australia to intervene and contribute to the debates on the concept of sedition within liberal democracies at large. On the basis of an analytical enquiry into the judicial discourse around sedition, the text of the sedition laws, their political uses, their quotidian existence, and their entanglement with the counter-terror legislations, the book theorizes upon the life of the law within liberal democracies.

The Janus Face of the Liberal International Information Order: When Global Institutions Are Self-Undermining

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-26
Author(s):  
Henry Farrell ◽  
Abraham L. Newman
Keyword(s):  
International Relations ◽  
Research Agenda ◽  
Global Information ◽  
Current Crisis ◽  
Liberal Democracies ◽  
Feedback Effects ◽  
Global Institutions ◽  
Information Order ◽  
Information Governance ◽  
Political Conditions

Abstract Scholars and policymakers long believed that norms of global information openness and private-sector governance helped to sustain and promote liberalism. These norms are being increasingly contested within liberal democracies. In this article, we argue that a key source of debate over the Liberal International Information Order (LIIO), a sub-order of the Liberal International Order (LIO), is generated internally by “self-undermining feedback effects,” that is, mechanisms through which institutional arrangements undermine their own political conditions of survival over time. Empirically, we demonstrate how global governance of the Internet, transnational disinformation campaigns, and domestic information governance interact to sow the seeds of this contention. In particular, illiberal states converted norms of openness into a vector of attack, unsettling political bargains in liberal states concerning the LIIO. More generally, we set out a broader research agenda to show how the international relations discipline might better understand institutional change as well as the informational aspects of the current crisis in the LIO.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document