The below clip further testifies to the crisis of democracy in the Western Christendom, but this time in reference to the former President Mr. Barack Obama’s speech, as published on April 22nd, 2022. The following are highlights from his speech:
“Democratic institutions suffer weakness around the world. There is a steady decline of number of people participating in unions, civic organizations and houses of worship. These are mediating institutions that served as communal glue.
What make democracy less appealing is rise of China, chronic political disfunction in USA and Europe, in addition to the collapse of financial systems in 2008. What is weakening democracy is the profound change in how we communicate and consume information on social media and the internet. Inflammatory and polarizing content on the Internet and social media, attracts and engages.
China and Philippines are two authoritarian regimes that “restrict” the use of internet. Putin and Steve Banon (a former advisor to the president Donald Trump) use the Internet and the social media to weaken the democratic institutions. They flood country’s public square with enough raw sewage, raise enough questions, spread enough dirt, plant enough conspiracy theories that citizens no longer know what to believe. Once they lose trust in their leaders, mainstream media, political institutions, each other and in the possibility of truth, the game is won! This led to the results of 2016 elections!
We are susceptible to lies and conspiracy theories. Putin didn’t do that, we did it to ourselves. If we do nothing, I am convinced the trends we are seeing will get worst. Without some “standards”, implications of this technology (internet and social media) for our elections, for our legal systems, for our democracy, for rules of evidence, and for our entire social order are frightening and profound!
The product (internet and social media) has some design flaws, and we need to fix it to make it better. It’s part of innovation. Social media technology didn’t not create our problems, but it can help managing the threats associated to such technologies.
Freedom of speech is necessary as required by the constitution. Fighting hate and inflammatory speech is not the solution. The answer to bad speech is a good speech.
We need to determine if social media content is weakening or strengthening the inclusive democracy. Whether it reinforces the rule of law and self-governance.
Tech companies have accountability. The efforts put in by tech companies to control “content” doesn’t go far enough! Tech companies need to be subjected to some level of public oversight and “regulations”. We expect Tech companies to re-affirm our democratic institutions. As Lincoln said:
“The information we get and the stories we tell can encourage the better angels of our nation”.
But it can also encourage the worst (demons!). A healthy democracy depends on our better angels being encouraged. So as citizens, we have to take upon ourselves to become better consumers of news.
Working on sources, thinking before we share and teaching our kids to become critical thinkers who know how to evaluate sources and separate operations from facts. We need to encourage online media literacy! Social media started as promising, but now it has a grimness to it”.
My response to Mr. Obama is as follows:
As for Autocracy: USA has the potential to be a Collective form of Autocracy in a Democracy, that often undermines justice. Just look at the chaos caused by USA’s invasion of Iraq, that replaced a stable Iraqi government with another controlled by the Iranian backed militias!
As for the accountability: What about USA government’s accountability for its policies? Do you accept to be accountable for illegally invading Iraq with false evidence, empowering Iranian backed militias and causing chaos, that has failed the country?
As for the malicious use of the internet and the social media: Doesn’t USA use the Internet and the social media to weaken its competitors and stable countries around the world? Didn’t USA under your leadership spread inflammatory and polarizing content on the Internet and social media, to attract and engage Arabs? Didn’t your administration use social media to fuel Arabic springs by flooding country’s public square with enough raw sewage, raising enough questions, spreading enough dirt and planting enough conspiracy theories, that brought nothing except destruction, chaos and militias to the Arabic world?
As for restricting the freedom of speech: Aren’t the “standards” you’re calling for nothing but regulations to be imposed on social media (Tech companies), in order to “restrict” freedom of speech, that your likes in the West bragged about to us in the East for decades? Don’t you by “standards” mean, the same restrictions imposed by China and other countries that you call Autocrats?! Who gets to define the necessary “standards”, “fixes” and “restrictions”? you or Trump?!
Let’s talk about hypocrisy: How is it that suddenly, it becomes ok for you to be an Autocrat and restrict freedom of speech, something you criticized China for practicing it just few minutes back in your speech?!
How come when we in the middle east try to fix such “design flaws”, you call it “Censorship” and call us “Autocrats”, but when you do such fixes, its “innovation” and “democracy”?
As for the freedom of speech: Are big Tech efforts in “content” control are really not enough, or you’re trying to silence independent opposition platforms such as the one established by President Trump? How do we know that you are not silencing voices that are challenging and exposing you? Isn’t challenging allowed for in any true democracy?
As for the constitutional rights: Seems to me, free speech was a democratic right when its content was controlled by western mainstream media. But not anymore, not now, when social media allows for true and real free speech (as fundamentally allowed by any true democracy and the institution). Now that freedom of speech is threatening your stability, it suddenly becomes ok for you to restrict it, as done by China and Philippine?!
As for the democratic values: Demonizing your opponents is and autocratic behavior. Referring to your party as “the angels” and to your opponents as “the worst” (the demons) is autocratically arrogant!
Mr. Obama! What you really lack are trustworthy and role model politicians. I hold you personally responsible for the crisis experienced by the democratic institution, formed by your founding fathers.
In general, Mr. Obama’s speech is questionable due to the unusually calm atmosphere and the full support expressed by the entire audience towards everything said by the speaker. This is contrary to the practice we are used to in the Western Christendom and democratic societies. Usually and especially in the presence of a controversial figure such as Mr. Obama or Trump, it is natural for some voices to rise from the audience, expressing their opposition to the speaker's ideas, but that didn't happen! Therefore, it is clear that the moderators of this speech have been extremely selective in “restricting” the audience to Mr. Obama's supporters alone. Is this the result of practicing the “standards” and regulations called for by Mr. Obama? Isn’t this an undemocratic act, that is known in the Westen Christendom as an act of tyranny and rejection of dissent!
In fact, the program moderators have gone one step further in “restricting” audience participation, by “turning off” the commenting feature on their YouTube channel, which is also an undemocratic act, known in the Western Christendom as an act of tyranny and rejection of dissents! Again, is this the result of practicing the “standards” and regulations called for by Mr. Obama?
It’s a mess! The democratic experience in the Western Christendom suffers from a real crisis of integrity. It’s unable to tolerate the unbridled transparency of social media, which had distinguished the Western Christendom for decades from the other so-called "Autocratic" regimes. Mr. Obama's ideas are a testament to the fact that they strongly tend to push their opponents aside and smug their lips in a new form of tyranny under restrictive free speech laws and standards!
Mr. Obama could certainly change the rules of the game and restrict freedom of speech, simply to avoid a repeat of 2016 election, but has considered the consequences? Has he ever wondered what would the long-term impact of such restrictions be on the American public opinion, who have already considerably lost confidence in the political parties and politicians? Wouldn’t his proposed solutions simply create a crisis, leading to the spread of a huge amount of dust, slime and filth (as he refers to), in addition to people demonizing him?! Shouldn’t his practical, political, and presidential background take him beyond such short-term solution that merely warrants "firefighting" and dumping dirt on cinder?
In fact, there is room for me to suggest that Mr. Obama should develop long term and sustainable solutions by carefully reading Mr. Rybrook's book and that of other thinkers and sociologists. Perhaps he should read my book twice. If I were him, I would apologize to myself!
Please refer to the YouTube link below titled "Former President Barack Obama speaks at Stanford University on the challenges of democracy."
