Taking Anonymity Too Far?

We've been hearing a lot of arguments about the benefits and deficits of anonymity online. Personally, I believe that benefits like being able to freely talk about personal problems, ask questions without the fear of being judged, and easily make all different types of new friends outweigh the negatives. However, there's always a group of people that takes things to the extreme. In terms of embracing and reveling in anonymity online, there is nobody who has taken this to such as an extreme as the infamous Anonymous.

Anonymous are a group of "hacktivists" (people who use hacking/cleaver usage of computers as a means to promote a political goal) who hide behind the mask of the Internet, as well as their symbolic Guy Fawkes masks (first seen in the movie V for Vendetta) to express their opinions. These people basically come together through the 4chan Internet community, which is an anonymous imageboard website that I have heard eloquently described by friends as a "condensation of the cesspool that is the internet". 4chan is extremely good at banding together for a cause, whether that is locating an image of a chart you vaguely remember seeing once in a text book, populating the latest meme, or launching an assault against human rights violators.

One of the most notable things Anonymous done is its crusade against the Church of Scientology. It all began as a little quibble over an video uploaded onto YouTube that the Church asked to have removed, and Anonymous insisted removing it would infringe upon free speech. This evolved into a war against the Scientologists for "exploiting church members and limiting free speech". They organized a series of attacks through the internet. Some of these carried over into the real world, manifesting as actual protests spurred by videos like this, causing over 7,000 protesters to gather worldwide on two occasions. While the merits of this particular agenda can be debated, they sometimes do have truly good intentions.

To cite a timely example, 4chan have been standing up for the Tunisian people. Together, they launched attacks on Tunisian government websites and even managed to post this message of warning ending in:

We are Anonymous.
We are the angry avatar of free speech.
We are the immune system of democracy.
We do not forgive censorship.
We do not forget free speech.
Expect us - always.

This looks philanthropic and lovely, but they also have a sick, anti-society side. Their 4chan roots show and they uphold the "cesspool" qualities the website is famous for. Many people were quite disturbed, for example, on May 20, 2009 when YouTube was flooded with uploads of porn. Often, it was disguised as a family or kid-friendly video. While they claimed to be doing this as a response to the removal of some music videos, I think that they just wanted to show off their power by pulling off something abhorrent.

I think that as long as Anonymous don't get so radical that they begin blurring the lines between activism and terrorism, it is probably good to have a group of people out there who is organized enough to speak against wrongdoings with a single, powerful voice. I'll pose the question to you, though: champions of human rights, or ne'er-do-well hackers with too much time on their hands?

Tunisia: Trouble in Paradise

Flash back a little more than one month ago to December 17^th of 2010—Mohamed Bouazizi, a 26-year-old Tunisian citizen and recent college graduate with a computer science degree, had started a fruit and vegetable stand to make ends meet. There was already a sense of unrest n the air as Tunisia was supposedly undergoing some of the worst unemployment rates in recent history as well as a spike in food prices across the country.

Picture Credit

Due to Mohamed’s lack of a vending license, authorities shut down his cart, confiscated his wares, and were even said to have slapped him around a bit. In protest over a lack of jobs, Mohamed set himself on fire in Sidi Bouzid, in front of a government building in an act of self-immolation. I seriously doubt that he had any idea of how great the scope of events his actions sparked would turn out to be: Mohamed became a symbol of resistance in the Arab world as several others copied his self-immolation protest in Algeria, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. While he survived the initial suicide attempt, he died later in the hospital after a visit from the President Ben Ali.

Mohamed’s death turned out to be the United States’ equivalent of “the shot heard ‘round the world” in 1775. Thousands took to the streets in protest of the government and of how the country’s leader received 90% of the vote over multiple elections and had been in power for over twenty years along with the issues mentioned in the first lines of this post.

This might have all fizzled out with the government either making a few concessions to smoothen out relations thereby calming down some of the more moderate protestors, or simply with the passing of time. The government’s reaction, however, would be their undoing. According to a BBC article published earlier today, between January 8^th-10^th, there were dozens of reported deaths during the protests.

Many have referred to this movement and these protests as a social media, and more specifically, a Twitter revolution. There is some credence to these claims as protesters organized and spread the word through their use of Twitter and Facebook. There is no doubt that technology and the newfound connectivity between Tunisians, in how their plight was played out in the eyes of the international community, played a huge role in the sacking of the interior minister, the dissolving of the parliament and Ben Ali’s subsequent flight.

Many claim, however, that it would be inaccurate to attribute this revolution to social media as there was already great dissatisfaction with the government and how Ben Ali and his wife’s families seemed to own every big business in Tunisia. Apparently they possessed extravagant wealth even as the rest of the country struggled to get by. Condoleezza Rice, in a state visit to Tunisia during the Bush administration, praised the country for its stability. The price of this stability, however, was limited freedoms in press and television as well as an excessive display of propaganda around the capital city.

But would the protests have been remotely as successful (I’m using the word “successful” very loosely as the killings were inexcusable) without mobile phones, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and blogs? I don’t think so. But what really charged the atmosphere for us in the United States (who in general are oblivious to the struggles of those outside our own country) were the videos rife with acts of violence posted online as well as the cables released by WikiLeaks which assert, in detail, the corruption of Ben Ali’s administration.

Here's Obama's take on the situation:

"I condemn and deplore the use of violence against citizens peacefully voicing their opinion in Tunisia, and I applaud the courage and dignity of the Tunisian people. The United States stands with the entire international community in bearing witness to this brave and determined struggle for the universal rights that we must all uphold, and we will long remember the images of the Tunisian people seeking to make their voices heard. I urge all parties to maintain calm and avoid violence, and call on the Tunisian government to respect human rights, and to hold free and fair elections in the near future that reflect the true will and aspirations of the Tunisian people.

As I have said before, each nation gives life to the principle of democracy in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people, and those countries that respect the universal rights of their people are stronger and more successful than those that do not. I have no doubt that Tunisia’s future will be brighter if it is guided by the voices of the Tunisian people."

But there’s little value in arguing the case, what matters is what lies ahead for Tunisia and its people, and whether there are further implications for other oppressed nations and whether these tools promoting connectivity will play a role in the days, weeks, months, and years ahead. Already there is evidence of this as Slim Amamou, one of the most prominent bloggers in Tunisia, accepted the post of Secretary of Youth and Sport. He has promised to keep the people updated via Twitter and would like for other cabinet members to also use Twitters as a means of communicating with citizens.

Currently, with no opposition leaders taking the mantle of leadership, Ben Ali’s Prime Minister has taken control and the future of the country is uncertain, though he has promised to step down as soon as elections are conducted democratically. I suppose all that’s left to do now is wait and see what’s next.

*UPDATE*

Professor Pruitt has brought it to my attention that there is a discrepancy between my source, International Business Times, and NPR with regards to Mohamed Bouazizi's academic standing. In my post, I stated that he had graduated from college with a computer science degree, but the more recently published article from NPR says that he had dropped out of high school. Wikipedia agrees with NPR.

Also, I read an article titled "Tunisian TV boss arrested for 'treason' as popular station that supported deposed president is closed down." I highly recommend checking it out if you want to follow up on the country's progress.

Other sources:

• http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/01/14/arab-bloggers-cheer-on-tunisias-revolution/?hp
• http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/18/world/africa/18egypt.html
• http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/01/14/tunisia.protests/
• http://www.mediabistro.com/prnewser/social-medias-role-in-tunisias-revolution_b12963