David Cameron

Recently, British Prime Minister David Cameron suggested that a way to control civil unrest is too limit social media access.

“Free flow of information can be used for good, but it can also be used for ill. So we are working with the police, the intelligence services, and industry to look at whether it would be right to stop people from communicating via these websites and services when we know they are plotting violence, disorder and criminality.”

It would seem that having criminals use the social media is not an entirely bad thing. That way the plotting is out in the open. It is easier to locate those responsible and develop countermeasures. Criminals use telephones and emails too but there aren’t any suggestions to ban their use of those tools.

The other interesting part of the Cameron’s statement is his use of disorder. Is promoting disorder a crime? There is an Orwellian hint in that statement.

Even more disparaging is the take from the Chinese on Cameron’s statement. The Chinese are giving it thumbs up. From Global Times, state-influenced media in China, is this reaction.

Cameron’s suggestion to block social networking websites smashes basic concepts of freedom of speech in the West, which always takes the moral high ground in criticizing the reluctant development of Internet freedom in developing countries.

The Chinese are always adept at locating hypocrisy, except when it points to them.

The British Government’s wariness of the Internet and Blackberry Messenger – symbols of freedom of speech – is a forced reaction, which might upset the Western world. Meanwhile, the open discussion of containment of the Internet in Britain has given rise to a new opportunity for the whole world. Media in the US and Britain used to criticize developing countries for curbing freedom of speech. Britain’s new attitude will help appease the quarrels between East and West over the future management of the Internet.

In other words, The Chinese see Britain as becoming more like China and other repressive countries. The Chinese hope that means no more finger wagging at international conferences over human rights violations.

If there is one thing that the Chinese fear it is the internet and that undercurrent of free speech and mass movements that it propels.

On the Internet, there is no lack of posts and articles that incite public violence. They will cause tremendous damage once they are tweeted without control. At that time, all governments will have no other choice but to close down these websites and arrest those agitators.

The Chinese feel emboldened by the reaction to the riots in Britain and general unrest throughout the West. They see time on their side and that their repressive ways will eventually prevail. The people must be controlled, the thinking goes, because without control the people will overthrow their benevolent leaders in China, Britain and elsewhere.

There is an uncomfortable similarity here between the 9/11-inspired Patriot Act and Cameron’s ideas in Britain. When there is violence and destruction, the first casualty is free speech. When the Chinese give a “like” to a style of repression, then that’s a sign to shift tactics. Tiananmen Square doesn’t belong in Trafalgar Square.