3/24 Lecture Notes

CA 610: Outline ? 3/24/09 Free Speech and Democratization Questions: Is freedom of speech possible only in democracies? Is freedom of speech necessary to democratic governance? (Conversely, is it possible to have a democracy without broadly protected freedom of speech?) Does the exercise of free speech necessarily undermine authoritarianism? I. INTRODUCTION: DEMOCRATIZATION VS. LIBERALIZATION Liberalization = process of removing or loosing of restrictions (usually economic) Indonesian case: closed a # of media outlets, until University students forced Suhardo to step down(economic opening (opening up to international trade) and political opening (opening of freedom of speech), and also democratization (which is not the same as throwing a dictator out of power). Former U.S.S.R. Gorbachev Glasnost Perestroika (economic restructuring) China (started with a University protest, and gov. opened fire on students; people tried to apply for permits to protest (and were denied protests and went missing or were arrested) Deng Xiaoping Tiananmen Square (1989) 2008 Olympics ? ?protest zones? and protest permits (Ji Sizun case, applied for permit and was sentenced with 3 years in prison) Democracy (working definition) = fair and open competition among people in a given community and among ideas in making decisions binding on all. II. MANIPULATING CULTURAL VALUES *Some speech can be harmful to individuals or to societies as a whole Case Study: Indonesia, largest Muslim nation in the world Three levels of justification for suppressing freedom of speech: 1) Different cultural values make Western free speech unsuitable to other countries 2) Threat of violent looming breakdown of civil order, and will breakdown if people start speaking freely. 3) Criticism of the government will make the country appear weaker or less stable to the outside world. Threat that foreign investors will pull out and destroy the economy. Collectivism does not lead to fascism Corporatism, revisited Indonesia?s ?New Order? under Suharto (1966-1998); lots of Western support, but was very tolerant of communism Democratic decision-making without individual rights is possible because Indonesians practice a unique form of deliberation: Musyawarah and mufakat, or ?consensus through mutual consultation? ? parallels with New England Town Hall model of deliberation? dangers of New England Town Hall model? *US 1st Amendment transcends the power of the state (beyond the law), while Indonesia?s article 28 states that freedom of speech shall be determined by legislation, which asserts the opposite notion that the state can and will regulate speech. Indonesia did not want strong protection for freedom of speech, and were laying foundation for a different type of democracy. -Citizens free to express anything they want as long as its not against the law. Lee Kuan Yew?s perspective on Western forms of deliberation?he thought it was dangerous III. MODELS OF CONTROL?BURMA, SINGAPORE, INDONESIA Former U.S.S.R. and the power of information to penetrate closed societies and undermine control But Indonesia more complicated The press as unwilling allies, revisited Suharto?s control of Indonesian press effective because: 1) Manipulated state-enforced, corporatist cultural values; 2) Used the country?s history of violence and division to instill general caution in people to avoid stirring up conflict; 3) Silenced critics through laws and other regulations that were vague and overbroad (inducing self-censorship and a ?climate of fear?) ? prohibited any speech that might be considered: seditious, insinuating, sensational, or speculative, or that might provoke ethnic, religious, racial, or intergroup tensions; 4) Shut down media outlets that violated these laws; 5) Transformed the media outlets who survived into unwilling, but highly effective, allies in guarding Suharto?s interests and the interests of family members and friends. IV. The role of compelled speech Suharto?s use of compelled speech to increase authority and force the press to participate in perpetuating this authority: Story of the 1978 bans ? newspaper owners and editors forced into ?ritual submission? to get the bans lifted. Signed 4-point pledge Point 3 most important: Owners and chief editors had to declare their readiness to carry out introspection, self-correction, and internal reform. Why does a newspaper?s survival after bans reinforce a leader?s power more than its closure would have? Sukarno?Indonesia?s 1st president, deposed by Suharto. Was a full-blown dictator. Suharto (1966-1998) arises and is supported by the West.