The internet gets involved in opposition

The internet and social media have become integral in combating repressive regimes. In places where governments limit the people’s right to assemble or speak out against the state, the internet is an essential tool in building an effective opposition movement. But as internet opposition grows, so does government censorship and surveillance. In order to overcome this online control and bring about fundamental change in the society at large, opposition must manifest itself offline as well. In short, the internet is an important tool, but only one in a multitude.

A key aspect of building a successful, cohesive opposition movement is gathering a likeminded and similarly frustrated community. Within such group, plans for change are formed and people who are dissatisfied with their government no longer feel alone. But in many places, the right to physically assemble simply does not exist.

Take Russia, for example. Protests must be cleared by the police weeks beforehand, and spontaneous protests, even peaceful ones, result in huge numbers of arrests. Even informal business meetings of opposition leadership are often shut down for trumped up reasons. In 2014 alone, multiple meetings of the powerful political opposition party Open Russia were interrupted on fake suspicion of bomb threats. Time and time again the Russian government has tried to make it impossible for opposition to gather, hoping to deter plans to challenge the regime.

The internet offers a platform to discuss offline action when there is no other option.

In connecting people online, the internet also opens opportunities for opposition to move to the streets. Social media has been a primary factor in a number of protest movements that resulted in the overthrow of unjust dictators. Most famously, Facebook and Twitter played an integral role in drawing protestors and building the movement in Egypt in 2011. Similarly, in Iran in 2009, Twitter spread news and gathered the people’s voices in protests expressing disapproval of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s reelection. Most recently, in May 2011 and again in December 2014 in Russia, powerful anti-corruption blogger Alexei Navalny used Twitter to call on people to protest in Moscow.

The protests that form as a result of online discussion are key. Without them, no actual tangible change would arise. This offline manifestation enables the cause to reach more people and the action to become more visible to the international community. This step is often terrifyingly dangerous, but without it, movements built online will eventually fall flat.

The internet is an important tool for a successful opposition movement, but it is not a perfect solution to all the resistance’s problems, especially when the government gets involved online, too.

For one thing, in places like China, the government strives to control political conversation in online forums. Topics deemed remotely threatening to the regime, like the Tiananmen Square massacre, are simply removed, thereby limiting what people can discuss. In Russia, the state controls public opinion by using pro-government “trolls” that provide contradicting comments on anti-government forums. In doing so, the regime can undermine the opposition’s arguments and paint online discourse in its favor. Online dissidents use code to get talk around the censorship, but conversations are nonetheless monitored, infiltrated and restricted.

The internet and social media have successfully enabled protest movements and led to change in instances like the Arab Spring, but it is by no means a fail-proof and risk-free method. As governments catch up to online challengers, it becomes even more important that opposition ultimately take the movement offline in order to take steps towards real change. In short, the internet is only one tool to challenge unjust regimes, albeit an important one.