Global Voices » Ideas

Video: Anatomy of a Good Advocacy Video by WITNESS

Juliana Rincón Parra — Wed, 16 May 2012 21:28:26 +0000

WITNESS, a site advocating for Human Rights Issues has produced a nice analysis of what makes a good Advocacy video, using Aristotle's' Poetic regarding story arcs.

China: Motor-Powered Breakfast Crepes

Juliana Rincón Parra — Wed, 16 May 2012 05:28:50 +0000

The Presurfer shares a video where we can see how the Beijing Jianbing is made. This large breakfast crepe is made possible thanks to a very steady hand and a motorized wheel that allows a really large and thin crepe to be evenly cooked.

Norway: Discussing Latin America at the Oslo Freedom Forum

Marianna Breytman — Tue, 15 May 2012 21:24:09 +0000

Last week, the fourth gathering of the Oslo Freedom Forum took place, organized by the Human Rights Foundation in the Norwegian capital. Under the slogan “From darkness to light,” the forum brought together world figures that aim to tackle humanitarian crises and exchange ideas to mitigate their effects. Rebecca MacKinnon, co-founder of Global Voices Online, was one of the main speakers during a session entitled “Voices in the dark.”

Among the topics that generated major interest throughout the forum was the current crisis in Syria and the political repression that some activists live with under Vladimir Putin's new government in Russia, as well as a review of the first year of the “Arab Spring.” Nevertheless, the event covered a series of topics that involved other world regions, among which was Latin America.

Humberto Prado, from Venezuela, was the first Latin American to speak before the forum about the reality of prisons in his country. Using horrific images of prisoners shooting into the air, which contrast one of a group of convicts playing in a symphony orchestra, Prado unveiled a terrifying statistic: 5,066 convicts have died since 1999, while 14,460 have been injured. He also asked the European Union to pay attention to Venezuelan penitentiaries.

Nicolás Perez, Director of Ecuadorian daily El Universo, exposed the iron fist of Rafael Correa's government, which left the newspaper with a million-dollar fine for publishing a letter to the editor where Correa's actions were criticized for allegedly ordering the army to open fire against a hospital during a police brawl, which led to a massive international condemnation against the lack of freedom of expression in the country.

Meanwhile, Mauricio Rodas, also from Ecuador and the founder of the Ethos Foundation, announced an innovative index that measures the poverty level in Latin America and has generated criticisms of Correa's government as well.

Lastly, Ethan Nadelmann, founder of the Drug Policy Alliance, highlighted the problem of drug consumption prohibition, which points to indiscriminate imprisonment of minorities in the United States — primarily the Hispanic population.

In Oslo, we had the opportunity to sit down with Venezuelan native Marcel Granier, General Director of Radio Caracas Television, whose signal was removed from open transmission in his country in 2007. Granier, who also participated in the second meeting of said forum on assault against the Venezuelan press, highlighted the importance of bringing up human rights issues in Latin America at European events due to the “connection that exists between Latin Americans and European countries like Spain and Portugal.”

With regards to the forum, Granier affirmed that “every day there is a greater sense of consciousness” about the current situation in Venezuela, which “increases [incidentally] the level of consciousness on a global level,” and brought attention to the fact that respecting human rights in his country will be fundamental to guaranteeing the well-being of all Venezuelans, in addition to securing diaspora's return to their land.

On Twitter, some Oslo Freedom Forum participants, like Oslo Scholars Program (@OsloScholars), emphasized certain excerpts of the Latin American speeches:

There is no dignity in prison: what exists is social cleansing” - Humberto Prado. Such a powerful speech on prison conditions in Venezuela.

Likewise, Runrunes (@RunRunesWeb) [es] pointed out that Humberto Prado's speech was quite powerful:

#Runrunes ALTO:De alto impacto ponencia de Humberto Prado (Observatorio Vzlano de Prisiones) en el Oslo Freedom Forum- http://ow.ly/aOfcW

#Runrunes STOP: Extremely compelling speech by Humberto Prado (Venezuelan Observatory of Prisons) at the Oslo Freedom Forum - http://ow.ly/aOfcW

Venezuela journalist Nelson Bocaranda (@Desconvocara) [es] highlighted an important declaration from Mauricio Rodas during the event:

Mauricio Rodas,miembro de la Fundacion Ethos que hizo radiografía de pobreza latinoamericana anuncio en Oslo q buscara Presidencia Ecuador

Mauricios Rodas, a member of the Ethos Foundation, who took an X-ray of Latin American poverty, announced in Oslo that he will seek Ecuadorian presidency

The following are images from the Latin American presentations at the Oslo Freedom Forum, courtesy of MarieBW and the author of this post.

Reception at Oslo's City Hall.

Participants share ideas in the intermission between speeches.

The forum closed with the awarding of the Vaclav Havel Prize for Creative Dissidence.

Saudi Arabia: May 7 Marked as Saudi Liberalism Day

Salah Almhamdi — Mon, 14 May 2012 14:59:09 +0000

On May 7 Saudi liberal activists gathered online to celebrate Saudi Liberalism Day, an initiative to acquire recognition and acceptance for liberal ideas. The gathering had to be online because it is forbidden to organize public meetings in Saudi Arabia.

Saudi liberals have been stigmatized for a long time for their progressive views and calls for human rights and democracy in a society that defines itself by its conservatism. They have been heavily attacked by the religiously-dominated ruling class. The group Saudi Liberalism aims in the long term to develop into a political organization.

7 May, 1st Saudi Liberalism Day. Image posted by Twitter user @mr_nejo.

Leading Saudi liberal activist, Souad Al Shammary, who is secretary-general of the group Saudi Liberalism, wrote:

@SouadALshammary: ‫#7مايو‬‏ دعوه لكل تيارات الوطن للحوار للمحبه للسلام للوحدة أرجوكم لاتقسمونا كلناهدفنا الإصلاح الليبراليه مجرد وسيله لاهدف لادين اعقلوافشلتونا

7 May is a call to all the factions to the country for dialogue, peace and unity. Please don't divide us. Reform is the goal of all of us. Liberalism is just a means not an end nor a religion. Use your minds, you disappointed us.

Secular university student Mohammad tweeted:

@M7mad_24: فكر بنفسك وأستعن بعقلك .. أحترم من يخالفك الرأي .. لا تؤجر عقلك لكنهة ووعاظ ‎:)‏)

Think by yourself and seek the help of your mind… Respect those who disagree with you… Don't “lease” your mind to priests and preachers.

Prominent liberal activist Wael Alqasm tweeted:

@waelalqasm: بدأ البذيئون في “تويتر” بالدعاء لي بالهداية والجنة، بعد أن عجزوا عن الانتصار بالشتائم. اللهم إن أدخلتهم جنتك، فاجعلني خالداً في النار أبداً.

Twitter's vulgar [users] started to call for me to have [religious] guidance and heaven after having failed to win through insults. O God, if you let them into your heaven, send me to hell for eternity.

Other people, however, criticized Saudi Liberalism Day as well as the idea of liberalism itself. Law graduate Jawahir Al Subaie commented:

@TheJawahir: I don't understand the purpose of Liberalism Day in ‪#Saudi‬ ‫#7مايو‬

Badr Al Rashed criticized Saudi liberals saying:

@BALRashed: الليبرالي السعودي يشجب ويتضايق من تشويه طالبان للإسلام لكنه ما يستاء من نحر أمريكا للحرية في أفغانستان والعراق ‎‫#7مايو‬‏ ‎‫

The Saudi liberal condemns and is annoyed by the Taliban's distortion of Islam but doesn't resent America's killing of the freedom in Afghanistan and Iraq

Abdullah Mohemed Al Dawood quoted [ar] Al Jazeera talk show host Faisal Al Qassem who apparently said: “I laugh very much when I see a secular man, who hasn't even convinced his family about his ideas, attacking the Islamists who control the streets everywhere.”

Abullrahman Al Kanhal criticized liberals in a blog post:

قيمهم الليبرالية تتمحور حول المرأة والهيئة والقضاء ، حتى بدا لكثير من الناس أن الليبرالية مجرد دعوات لإختلاط ومعاداة لرجال الشريعة.
الليبرالية الحقة لا تتجزأ ولا تتلون مثل حرباء الليبرالية السعودية ، فهم فجأة ضد ثورات الشعوب ، و ضد مطالب الإصلاح. […] لم يكن لهم حديث عن الفقر ولا الفساد إلا عندما منحهم الملك عبدالله الضوء الأخضر

Their liberal values are focused on women, the Committee [for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice] and the judiciary, to the extent that it seems to many people that liberalism is just a call for intermixing [between men and women] and against religious scholars.
True liberalism is indivisible and not colored like the chameleon of Saudi liberalism, as they are suddenly against the peoples' revolutions and the demands for reforms. […] They didn't talk about either poverty or corruption, only when King Abdullah gave them the green light.

China: Mother's Day

Oiwan Lam — Mon, 14 May 2012 12:48:59 +0000

David Wertime from Tea Leaf Nation blogs about Weibo users' expression of love towards their mothers in May 13 mother's day.

China: In Bo Xilai Saga, Did Social Media Challenge Government?

Violeta Camarasa — Fri, 11 May 2012 12:53:47 +0000

This post is part of our special coverage International Relations & Security.

Bo Xilai portrayed as Greek mythology character Icarus, who tried to fly too close to the sun with a set of wings made from wax. Source: Beijing Cream.

Political struggle, murder, corruption, espionage and diplomatic conflict - the downfall of Bo Xilai from the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) elite ranks has turned out to be a multi-faceted story. The Bo Xilai affair is also a good example of the disruptive role that social media plays in today’s China. Despite censorship, discussions on social networks caused international media to prick up their ears.

With the CCP's once-in-a-decade leadership succession [pdf] scheduled for October 2012, Bo Xilai’s case has jumped to the front page of international and local media. It has been widely argued that social media has made it unfeasible for the government to keep the story behind the scenes. However, it is also true that the government has stirred social media to its own advantage. Did the Chinese government really want to hide Bo Xilai’s story? Did social media really challenge the government control on information? The opacity of China’s politics makes it impossible to answer these questions, but they are worth a thought.

Let’s re-cap on how Chinese social media played a major role by apparently forcing disclosure and challenging government control on information.

February 2012

1. First rumors spread

Wang Lijun, Vice-Mayor of Chonqing, disappears from his post. Despite censorship, speculation regarding his whereabouts spreads on China’s micro-blogs. The rumors state that Wang has requested political asylum at the US consulate after falling out of favor with the local high-profile party secretary Bo Xilai, who aspires to a top political post. Wang may have denounced Bo's implication in the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood.

2. A “vacation-style therapy”

An official statement on the Twitter-like Sina Weibo says Wang has been temporarily removed from his post for a “vacation-style therapy”. The phrase becomes an ironic meme on the Chinese Internet.

3. Where are the censors?

The Chinese government confirms that Wang did enter the US consulate in a post on Sina Weibo that netizens hurry to re-tweet. The censorship machine not only allows but boosts online discussions, making netizens suspicious. Blogger C. Custer, from ChinaGeeks writes:

At the moment, Wang is back on the Sina Weibo trending topics list twice. […] Searches for “Wang Lijun” (typed correctly) remain uncensored. It’s quite clear that Sina is not trying to suppress this story at all, which begs the question: is someone at Sina trying to damage Bo Xilai?

March 2012

4. First rumors confirmed

Official news agency Xinhua makes a double announcement: Wang has been removed from his position and Bo Xilai has been replaced as Chonqing Party Chief by Zhang Dejiang. Another report confirms that Wang did request political asylum at the US consulate.

5. Second wave of rumors flows in

In the midst of hectic public discussion on Bo’s political purge, online rumors spread about a coup d’état in Beijing and a confrontation between President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao on one side, and Bo’s supporter Zhou Yongkang on the other.

6. Talks of coup finally wake the Great Firewall up

Micro-blogging sites Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo block word search facilities. Days after the blocking, the government cracks down on social media. Six people are arrested and 16 websites closed for “disseminating online rumors” that “severely disturb the public order, undermine social stability and deserve punishment”, Xinhua reported. The same report states Sina Weibo and Tencent Weibo have been “criticized and punished accordingly”. The two sites halt the posting of comments for three days.

April 2012

7. Rumors become the truth

On April 10, Xinhua makes two separate announcements: Bo’s dismissal from his position at the CCP Central Committee for “serious discipline violations”, and his wife's alleged role in the murder of British businessman Neil Heywood over “economic interests”.

Netizens can't get over their surprise. The rumors that have been flooding the net for months suddenly make it to the covers of all official newspapers. Jing Gao, from

Ministry of Tofu writes:

Weibo user Zhang Xingsheng wrote, “We had already followed the instruction from the higher-up that we’d never believe or spread a rumor. But today, the rumor became the truth! I am puzzled! To believe or not to believe? This is a question!

China’s 550 million micro-blog users have witnessed a twisted public information stratagem. Online rumors becoming official truth overnight, endorsed by the same official media that censored and demonized them in the name of social harmony.

8. Political struggle and corruption

The government insists that Bo’s fall is a fight against corruption that has nothing to do with political struggle. As details on Bo’s family fortune emerge, public discussion gets heated over the enrichment of party officials. With corruption debate taking over the press, the government manages to sideline sensitive discussion on political infighting.

Again, Jing Gao reflects:

But one thing is certain. Before the advent of social media, the government never owed the people an explanation. […] Today, with tens of millions of Chinese actively use Sina Weibo, a low murmur of political gossip may have already been amplified and heard by thousands before the internet police step in.

Social media play a major role boosting public discussion in China by breaking systematic cover ups. However, it seems clear enough that the Chinese government has shown a remarkable expertise in playing with censorship, leaking or blocking information at its convenience to lead public opinion. Who wins? Do China’s social media outlets really challenge the government’s control of information?

This post and its translations to Spanish, Arabic and French were commissioned by International Security Network (ISN) as part of a partnership to seek out citizen voices on international relations and security issues worldwide.Visit the ISN blog and see more related stories.

Russia: Yavlinsky Stir Reveals Opposition Rift

Kevin Rothrock — Fri, 11 May 2012 12:41:14 +0000

On May 10, Grigory Yavlinsky [en] controversially wrote [ru] in his LiveJournal blog that the Russian opposition's recent turn to more confrontational tactics is a bad omen for democracy. Yavlinsky, born the same year as Vladimir Putin, is one of Russian politics' oldest faces. He played a pivotal role in the immediate post-Soviet period, authoring important elements of Russia's transition to a free-market economy. Since the 1990s, Yavlinksy has been the face of Yabloko [en], Russia's original liberal democrat political party. In the Putin era, Yavlinsky's party has remained a curious outlier to both “systemic politics” and “nonsystemic politics,” having lost its Duma presence in 2007 but remaining an officially registered party that is still viewed by many oppositionists as compromised and pro-establishment.

Grigory Yavlinskiy, economist and politician, 15 Jan 2011, photo by Skilpaddle, CC BY-SA 3.0; Wikimedia Commons.

True to Yabloko's troubled past and present, Yavlinksy's May 10 blog post has upset many and pleased relatively few. While he made a point of praising protesters' bravery and placing “main responsibility” on the authorities ('those who falsify elections, propagate corruption and thievery,' etc.), many have focused exclusively on Yavlinsky's criticisms of the protest movement. Lenta.ru, for instance, ran an article [ru] titled, “Yavlinsky Declares Protests Meaningless.”

Yavlinsky's concerns with the new developments in Moscow protests center on spiking violence and a perceived drift away from politics. He writes:

При этом я считаю, что если у организаторов есть расчет на то, что жестокость омоновцев будет мультиплицировать количество желающих с ними сражаться, то это неверный расчет. Опыт Триумфальной показывает, что мультипликации не получится. Наоборот, люди перестанут ходить на митинги и шествия, если там льется кровь, если их там избивают. Неужели кто-то полагает, что можно чего-то добиться лобовым столкновением, гражданской войной?

[…]

САМИ ПО СЕБЕ ГРАЖДАНСКИЕ МИТИНГИ, АКЦИИ, ГУЛЯНИЯ И ПРОЧИЕ ФЛЕШМОБЫ, ПРИ ВСЕЙ ИХ ЧЕЛОВЕЧЕСКОЙ ДОСТОЙНОСТИ, ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИ НИЧЕГО НЕ ИЗМЕНЯТ И В СИЛУ СВОЕЙ БЕСПОМОЩНОСТИ БУДУТ ЧАСТО ПЕРЕРАСТАТЬ В ДРАКИ И СХВАТКИ. Разрастание насилия сделает ситуацию во всех отношениях гораздо хуже.

If organizers are counting on the brutality of riot police to multiply the number of people wishing to join their fight, I think that's a flawed count. The experience of Triumfalnaia [Square] shows that no such multiplication occurs. On the contrary, people stop coming to rallies and marches, if blood is being spilled there, or if people are being beaten. Do some people really believe that anything can be accomplished with a head-on collision, or a civil war?

[…]

BY ITSELF, CITIZEN DEMONSTRATIONS, RALLIES, WALKABOUTS, AND SIMILAR FLASHMOBS (WITH ALL THEIR HUMAN DIGNITY) WILL NOT CHANGE ANYTHING POLITICALLY, AND BY VIRTUE OF THEIR OWN IMPOTENCE WILL OFTEN ESCALATE INTO FIGHTING AND CRACKDOWNS. The spread of violence will make the situation much worse in every respect.

As an alternative to this brand of dissent, he proposes a response “personal, programmatic, idealogical, organized, professional, moral, AND POLITICAL,” saying that a gradual, long-term approach is the only real option:

Надо начинать заниматься серьезной политикой , выигрывать выборы и брать власть. Долго? Да, шесть лет очень долго, но раньше и мы ничего не успеем. И следует понимать - альтернатив будет не одна, а три: левая, демократическая и националисты. Какая победит - скажет народ.

We have to take up serious politics, win elections, and take power. Will it be a long time? Yes, six years is very long, but we'll not manage this any sooner. And it's worth understanding that there won't be just one alternative, but three: leftist, democratic, and nationalist. Which wins out, the people will say.

Reactions to Yavlinsky's comments have varied. Some bloggers have been less than polite. Anti-Putin LiveJournal user i_l_d responded [ru] simply: “Go screw yourself, Yavlinsky.” Nationalist blogger sinn-fein-front wrote [ru] gloatingly:

Ну вот и Явлинский, отчисливший Навального за национализм, в своем блоге на Эхе Москвы признал националистов равноценной силой протеста. Что ж, отрадно. Один за одним падают бастионы русофобии в публичной политике

Well look here: Yavlinsky, who expelled Navalny [from Yabloko] for his nationalism, has in his blog acknowledged that nationalists are equal members of the protest [movement]. Well, how pleasant. One by one, the bastions of russophobia in public politics are falling.

Prominent blogger Rustem Adagamov [en], linking to the above-mentioned Lenta.ru article (not Yavlinsky's original text), tweeted [ru]:

Вот и Явлинский! http://lenta.ru/news/2012/05/10/yavl/ “Надо начинать заниматься серьезной политикой” Вау, а 16 лет до этого—это что было?

And here's Yavlinksy! [link to the Lenta.ru story] “We have to take up serious politics.” Wow, and the last 16 years — what was all that?

Dmitri Ivanov, a political satirist from the website CarambaTV.ru [ru], a webtv project, tweeted [ru]:

Явлинский заявил о бессмысленности митингов. Митинги заявили о бессмысленности Явлинского

Yavlinsky has declared the meaninglessness of the protests. The protests have declared the meaninglessness of Yavlinsky.

Despite the backlash against a politician infamous for upsetting pro-Kremlin and oppositionist figures alike, support for Yavlinsky also exists on the RuNet. Some of his supporters are predictable, like Ivan Bolshakov, a deputy chairman of Yabloko's Moscow branch, who faulted [ru] critics for taking Yavlinsky's words out of context:

И каким же надо быть простачком (или сознательным дискредитатором?), чтобы этот смысл извратить до «Явлинский – против митингов» и фактически приравнять заявление Явлинского к позиции Путина его дружков!?

What kind of simpleton (or conscious discreditor) does one have to be to distort this into ‘Yavlinksy is against the demonstrations' and equate his statement with the position of Putin and his buddies!?

Vladimir Milov [en], another prominent oppositionist politician who briefly served in the Russian government as Deputy Energy Minister in 2002, is another figure who has publicized his disdain for street confrontations. He tweeted [ru] a mild attack on Lenta.ru and announced his support for Yavlinsky's comments:

Вот образчик типичного наглого хипстерского вранья http://www.lenta.ru/news/2012/05/10/yavl/ а вот оригинал, с которым я полностью согласен http://gr-yavlinsky.livejournal.com/43985.html

Here's a sample of some typical, obnoxious, hipster baloney [link to Lenta.ru story] and here's the original, with which I agree entirely [link to Yavlinsky's blog].

In the aftermath of parliamentary elections, between December 2011 and February 2012, the Russian opposition experienced an explosion of mass popularity that disadvantaged professional politicians like Yavlinsky and Milov, whose careers (or ‘activism,' if one prefers) are fixed on evolutionary improvements to Russian society and governance. Theirs is the politics of policy and statecraft — what critics view as regime-collaboration and allies see as realistic, constructive work.

Current developments in Russia's protest movement have widened the gap between populist dramatics and nuts-and-bolts politics. Consequentially, Yavlinsky's blog-post scandal is symptomatic of a growing rift between guards Old and New. And, yet, men like Milov are fairly young. (He turns forty this summer.) The question is less about age than temperament and tactical preferences. Does one work ‘within the system' for gradual change — a relatively thankless task with only distant satisfaction — or, to borrow a phrase from Yavlinsky, opt for more aggressive “head-on collisions”?

China: Political Space of the Weibo Blogging Platform

Oiwan Lam — Thu, 10 May 2012 08:04:32 +0000

Chicago University Sociology Professor Zhao Dingxin recently delivered a speech entitled “Weibo, Political Space and China Development” at East China Normal University. Zhao's reservations on the technological setting and nature of Weibo, a well known Chinese micro-blogging platform, has triggered debate and reflections amongst Chinese bloggers.

Reflections on Weibo

Zhao's speech has been partial transcribed and published in local newspaper Dongfang Daily (via NetEase) [zh]. Below is a selected translation of the transcript:

微博是一个彻底民主的同时又是可被操纵性很强的通讯手段。说它是最彻底的民主是因为微博只需写寥寥几句话，只要知道怎么用微博，谁都能写，写得好坏也无所谓。说它可操纵性强，是因为微博中的声音不具有“一人一票”的性质。…只要一个人掌握着大量的金钱或者某种技术，那个人就能通过雇佣水军把自己的声音做大，于是就形成了虚假舆论。这里面可操纵的余地太大。

Weibo is an absolutely democratic but highly manipulative mode of communication. It is democratic in the sense that the user only need to write a few sentences. Once a person knows how to login, s/he can start writing regardless of the quality. It is manipulative in the sense that each voice does not register the character of an equal vote… If a person controls a lot of money or certain technology, s/he can hire an online army to magnify their voice and create fake public opinion. The space for manipulation is huge.

前台行为和后台行为的区隔是我们社会文明处事的一个很重要的原则。但是在微博的公共空间中前台行为和后台行为的界限不再清晰。微博中的言论是面向社会的，它们本来应该是前台行为。但是微博中许多人并不在自己熟悉的圈子内混，不少人的真实面目我们完全不清楚。这些人因此能在微博中动辄破口大骂，而不怕受到惩罚。从这个意义上来说，微博公共空间的出现把人类的许多后台行为前台化了，这就是微博语言暴力趋向背后的结构性原因。

The distinction between front-stage and back-stage behavior marks the principle of our social manner. However, in Weibo, the line between front-stage and back-stage has been blurred. The speech in Weibo is directed to society and thus should be considered as front-stage behavior. However, many Weibo users are not hanging around with their own social circle and the users don't know each other's real self. Hence, they can swear and get away with peer pressure. In this sense, the public sphere of Weibo has turned the back-stage into the front-stage. This is the structural explanation for the verbal violence and abusive language [evident] in Weibo.

 从一定意义上说，在微博公共空间中，人们的表现会接近于勒庞所描述的“乌合之众”，他们一方面表现得特别不服从权威，另一方面又在操纵下特别容易对权威产生崇拜甚至盲从。微博中的狂热之士很像“文革”中的红卫兵：一方面喊着打倒一切、怀疑一切；另一方面喊着谁敢反对某个权威我们就打倒谁。

In some sense, people are acting like Gustave Le Bon's description of “the crowd” in Weibo's public sphere. They are against authority on the one hand, but on the other hand worship authority. Some Weibo fanatics are acting like the Red Guards in the Chinese Cultural Revolution: tearing down everything and putting everything in doubt, while at the same time attacking whosoever opposes the leader's [here means Mao Tzedong] authority.

Zhao pointed out that most of the debates in Weibo are ideological and he used famous Chinese writer Han Han's ghostwriter scandal as an example to explain his point:

我本以为这一场争论的核心是真假问题，而不是价值观问题，是比较容易说清楚的。但我马上发觉支持作家的人士大致可分为相互重叠的三类人士。第一是原教旨自由主义者。这些人士认定作家是盟友，并认为打假是政治阴谋，是价值观和意识形态层面上的问题，不是一个简单的真假问题。第二就是作家的“粉丝”。不读大学就可以当作家、收入不菲还可以打扮得很酷的生活令年轻人羡慕。维护作家对他们来说，犹如维护宗教信仰一般是他们的责任。第三，就是一些缺乏常识的人，对于这些人来说，什么奇迹都可以发生，常识简直就是对他们认知的亵渎。

At first, I thought the core issue of this debate is a matter of true or false rather than value judgement. Then I found out that those who support the writer could be divided into three types of characters. First are liberalist fundamentalists. They consider the writer as their alliance and see the scandal as a political conspiracy. It is an ideological matter rather than an issue of true and false. The second type are the writer's fans. A writer without a university degree, a cool lifestyle different from typical rich people; many young people adore the writer and feel responsible to defend him. Such behavior is religious in nature. The third type of people are those who lack common sense. They believe in miracles and detest common knowledge.

Zhao believes that such irrational populist sentiment is rooted in the disintegration of the value system in mainland Chinese society as a result of the cultural revolution, the lack of direction in humanities subjects in the education, people's skepticism of the mainstream media and the culture of a mass consumption society.

Reactions online

Some Chinese netizens disagreed with Zhao's observations. For example, blogger Zuo Zhijian pointed out [zh]:

微博有商业水军潜伏，这固然是一个事实。但赵教授忽视了另外一个事实，即微博是一个开放的平台，意味着这是一个自由的言论市场。…即便是水军，在微博上也要比BBS上更容易识别。相信普通网民识别水军的能力，不会弱于公知，因为他们早就熟悉各类网络工具，在水军的风浪中久经考验了。
如果纵向比较，把微博与电视、广播做比较，应该很清楚“操控受众”的难度已经难太多了。

It is true that there is a ‘commercial army' [promoting things] on Weibo. But Zhao has omitted the fact that Weibo is an open platform and a free speech market… It is more easy to distinguish the ‘army' on Weibo than on BBS [Bulletin Board System]. Ordinary netizens' ability to distinguish the ‘online army' is not be weaker than that of public intellectuals. In fact, they have long experience in fighting against the ‘army' across different online platforms.
When compared with TV and radio broadcast, on Weibo it is a lot more difficult to manipulate the audience.

Zuo agreed that it is difficult to develop consensus via Weibo but he stressed that's the reason why public intellectuals should engage more with the open platform:

认识到微博的局限性，政治家与知识分子就更应主动应对并利用微博的长处。
作为政治家，应该更快更及时地提供公共信息，消除民众的疑惑。
作为知识分子，则应该意识到，微博传播价值远高过辩论价值，所以是一个很好的启蒙平台。在中国这样言论空间稀缺的环境下，更几乎是唯一的平台。
当下在中国，启蒙也远比辩论来的重要。知识分子也知道，民众有危险的民粹倾向，这恰恰意味着知识分子还需要做太多事情。
这个时代知识分子面临的环境，与历史上其他时期最大的不同就在于，有了互联网这样的开放平台。了解并善用互联网工具，是这一代知识分子的必修课。

Knowing the restriction of Weibo, politicians and public intellectuals should be more engaged and help to make use of the advance setting of the platform.
For politicians, they should provide accurate public information to clear people out from speculation.
For intellectuals, they should be making use of Weibo's distributive power rather than entangling in the debate of its nature. It is a platform for people's enlightenment. In particular in China where we lack free speech space, Weibo has become the only platform.
In China, the enlightenment project is more important than debate. Now that intellectuals are aware of the populist tendency, which means you have to work hard.
The environment Chinese intellectuals are facing now is very different from our precedents, we have the Internet, an open platform. The fundamental course for intellectuals is to understand and actively making use of the tool.

Blogger Shan Gu's view echoed with [zh] Zuo Zhijian's criticism and looked deeper into the nature of Weibo as an open platform:

固然，微博空间是个大杂烩，其中高雅与低俗并存，美丽与丑陋同行，真相与谣言齐飞。但同时，与传统媒体相比，微博具有更高效的记忆功能：要证明传统媒体在两年前曾经说谎，你或许需要亲自跑一趟档案馆；而要证明一名微博大V两年前曾经说过谎，则只需要点击一下鼠标。因此，微博空间虽然谣言横飞，但其自身便具备了自洁功能，任何试图用谎言、谣言或其他各种极端思想来“操纵网民”作法最终都只会落人笑柄。

The Weibo space is highly diversified. High and low culture, beauty and ugliness, truth and rumor co-exist. However, when compared with the conventional media, Weibo has very good memory function. If we have to prove that a conventional media told a lie two years ago, we have to dig into its archive. If we have to prove a Weibo opinion leader for telling a lie two years ago, we just need to hit our keyboard. Although there are a lot of rumors in Weibo, the rumors would be cleared in time. Lies, rumors and other manipulative acts would become a joke eventually.

勒宠的“乌合之众”非常强调集体行为的“在场感”，只有亲身置于集体行为的特定场域之中，个体的非理性情绪才会在交互影响中被不断加强、放大并最终主宰个人的行动；而网络上的非理性情绪则缺乏这种“在场感”，其非理性情绪没有被放大、被加强的途径，所以其非理性情绪至多也不过是凝聚为几句“气壮山河”的国骂罢了，即便真的有极少数人会付诸行动，其行动也往往是基于功利计算后的个人行为——要理解上述两者之差异，只要想一下在现场看球、和十几个在电视前看球与一个人在家里看球有何不同便可以明了。

Le Bon description of “the crowd” stresses the effect of collective presence. Only when a person is in a collective presence, would his/her irrational emotion be magnified and take control of the individual's behavior. On the Internet, irrational emotion do not have such kind of collective presence and could not be further magnified. It expresses in the form of four-letter [curse] words. Even if a minority of them take action, such action would be based upon a very utilitarian calculation. To understand the difference, we can compare the emotional effect of watching a football match at the pitch with a huge crowd and watching it on a TV screen with a dozen friends.

微博公共空间的隐忧不在于其可能被心怀不轨的“阴谋家”操纵，而在于其可能被国家机器控制——只有国家的控制才不受成本与收益的市场规律制约，并且能凭借其垄断性的资源而使其影响力超越时空范围的限制，获得主宰性的地位。因此，如果网民真的可能存在被操纵的危险，则其危险的根源绝不源于微博自身，而源自微博之外的强制性力量。

The underlying threat of the Weibo public sphere does not lie in the hand of some “conspirators” but in the state machine. Only state control will not be restricted by cost and effectiveness. Its monopolized power allows its influence to extend beyond temporal and spatial restriction and achieve domination. If netizens are to be manipulated, the threat does not stem from the Weibo platform, but the coercive force from outside the platform.

赵鼎新教授的观点则体现了一种智识上的高傲，在他眼中，“网民”是非理性、易忽悠且缺乏常识的，韩寒粉丝的认知能力更甚至是“亵渎常识”的（视他为奇迹、像维护宗教信仰一样维护他）……但他可能忘了，常识的普及永远不可能建立在“先知式”的智者对公众高高在上的“教化”基础之上，而只可能通过信息的自由与开放而实现。

Professor Zhao Dingxin's viewpoint reflects his [feeling of] intellectual superiority. In his eyes, “netizens” are irrational, easily manipulated and in lack of common sense. Han Han's fans' intellect has blasphemed common knowledge (they defend him as if he were a miracle or a religion)… But he has forgotten that the popularization of common knowledge cannot be founded by the “cultivation” of “prophecy” of a guru upon the public. It can only be actualized in an open society with free information flow.

The thumbnail photo showing Professor Zhao Dingxin is accredited to Dongfang Daily via NetEase.

Russia: Charity Crowdfunding

Catherine Lawlor — Wed, 09 May 2012 17:39:59 +0000

Private Charity: the Situation in Russia

The main representatives of the ‘third sector economy' are non-profit organizations and independent voluntary bodies. Despite the obvious importance of the contributions from volunteers, charities, and NGOs to the resolution of social, ecological, and legal problems (among others), their status is extremely unstable. The activities of NGOs are severely restricted by legal regulations, and their financial situation depends mainly on the generosity of individual donors and businesses.

Last year, Russia moved up from 138th to 130th place in the annual ‘World Giving Index' [ru] compiled by the Charity Aid Foundation (CAF). Each country's ranking is based on several indicators: private individuals' donations, voluntary work, and impromptu charitable acts (for example, giving money to beggars). Despite Russia's moving up on the list, the situation cannot be considered favorable for the charity sector.

In terms of charitable donations in Russia, business contributions remain incomparably higher than private donations. This can be explained by the fashionableness of corporate social responsibility (which in one form or another exists today even in small businesses), as well as the fact that large corporations are obliged to fulfill certain budgetary redistributions in the regions where they maintain a presence.

No provision is made in Russia for tax breaks or other incentives for donors, and — despite the best efforts of the non-profit sector to expand through social media and the wider mass media — there are very few successful cases. This is possibly because ideas about mutual aid and voluntary participation in the resolution of problems that are not one's ‘own' have yet to become mainstream.

According to the research carried out, only 5% of those questioned across Russia donate to charity. Certainly, on a national scale, this seems insignificant. But this is not to say that there is a lack of successful ‘people' projects, financed by private philanthropy. While much activity exists only in cyberspace, the effects of charitable organizations' work is quite tangible and real, and confidence in these groups is undiminished. The proof: the Tugeza [ru] (”Together”) community.

“Togetha: Suddenly Inflicting Good!”

The section on the official Tugeza site, titled ‘Who Is Doing This?' states the following:

Нас часто с опаской спрашивают: «Кто вы, ребята?» Мы теряемся, краснеем и не знаем, что ответить в двух словах. Мы не религиозная секта, не политическая партия, не благотворительный фонд, да чего уж там, мы даже плохо знаем друг друга.

We are often cautiously asked, ‘Who are you guys?' We get a bit lost, blush, and don't know how to sum it up in a nutshell. We are not a religious sect, a political party, or a philanthropic fund; really, we don't even know each other all that well.

Tugeza began its life on the blog dirty.ru [ru] and eventually became, on August 7, 2010, a volunteer project. The names of the organizers are not a trade secret, but finding them is practically impossible. This is on purpose, as Tugeza is not a hierarchical structure but a ‘charitable anarcho-syndicate,' as it is called by its creators.

Screenshot of Togeza's website, 9 May 2012.

Tugeza is now a community without leaders. The running and moderation of the portal is handled by coordinators: the founding fathers and newer volunteers, whose participation is strongly encouraged. Sometimes this coordination is carried out on a regional basis and the monitoring of activities being carried out is taken on by volunteers who live not far from (or at least closest to) to the location where the aid is being directed.

Tugeza helps to attract financing for projects all over Russia that are diverse in both theme and scale: at the moment, volunteers are raising funds for a rehabilitation and education complex in Kaluga [ru] and last month helped an equine therapy center in the Pskov region [ru].

The technology on which the work of Tugeza is built is called crowdfunding [ru]: the collective collaboration of people who voluntarily pool their money or other resources (as a rule, via the Internet) in order to support the efforts of other people or organizations.

How Tugeza works

It all begins with a discussion through the community's social networks: who needs help? And what kind of help? Each project is jointly organized, so that anyone wishing to can make a contribution and share what they have to offer — transport, for example, or the possibility of helping not by collecting money but by donating unneeded clothing, a drumkit, for instance, or bringing friends along to volunteer. This way, as practice shows, significant resources can be shared: time, as well as money.

Next comes the most interesting part: information about the new project is posted on the Tugeza site, such as how much money must be raised and the timeframe involved, what it is being spent on, and who is being helped. Sometimes the beneficiaries are located in isolated rural regions where there is no Internet access, without the chance to comment on what is going on or take part in the fundraising themselves. In such cases, this work is undertaken by Tugeza organizers, who more often than not remain behind the scenes.

All funds are raised virtually, via e-wallet. On the one hand this complicates fundraising (not everyone has an e-wallet) but, on the other, it makes it simple to keep track of things. Tugeza fights the mistrust of e-payments and, even moreso, of ‘e-philanthropy' as best they can: they have released data regarding the proceeds of their Yandex e-wallet, so that everyone can see that their donations have been received. After the completion of the project, they can see on the same site how their money has been spent.

Original [ru]

Russia: Putin's Return Rouses Online Polemics

Donna Welles — Wed, 09 May 2012 16:03:03 +0000

In the wake of protests against Vladimir Putin's inauguration, the reactions of Russian bloggers demonstrate a wide spectrum of opinion online. That oppositionist activism has suddenly taken on a more radical tone has only further inflamed the passions of already polemicized observers.

In the Eyes of History

Certain bloggers have raised vivid, though not always convincing, historical analogies in their posts about the May 6 protests.

Vladislav Naganov, oppositionist blogger and frequent author at Novaya Gazeta, authored a post [ru] titled, “This is War,” where he compared police brutality on May 6 to the French invasion in 1812, as well as the Nazi offensive in 1941:

Скажу сурово, без прикрас – как оно есть. Это – война. Идёт битва за Россию. Я надеюсь, что каждый, кто до сих пор этого не понимал – теперь, наконец, это понял. Уже сброшены все маски. Расставлены все точки над «i». Отныне война народу объявлена публично.

I'll say this harshly and without embellishment — just how it is: this is war. The battle for Russia is underway. I hope that each person, who didn't understand this before, finally understands now. Everyone's true colors are at last revealed. All the i's have been dotted. From here on out, war has been declared publicly on the people.

In a post [ru] titled, “The Bloody Sunday of the 21st Century,” blogger Sparkman likened the violence outside Bolotnaia Square to the 1905 massacre [en] of protesters outside Tsar Nicholas II's Winter Palace in St. Petersburg.

Собственно, ведь и демонстрация 9 января 1905 года рассматривалась не как начало Революции, но как последний всплеск петиционной кампании, начатой осенью 1904 года – сперва банкетами во славу призывов к реформам, затем принятием либеральных обращений от имени земств, адвокатских и профессорских собраний.

In fact, the actual demonstration on January 9, 1905, is seen not as the beginning of the [Bolshevik] Revolution, but as the final episode of the petitions campaign, which first began in 1904 as a series of banquets celebrating the calls for reform, and then grew into various liberal public appeals from groups of councilmen, lawyers, and professors.

What It Means For the Future

Putin and his wife in the Kremlin's Cathedral Square in Moscow after the inauguration ceremony, (7 May 2012), photo by the Presidential Press and Information Office, CC BY-SA 3.0; Wikimedia Commons.

Rather than turn to the Imperial or Soviet past, other bloggers have focused instead on what the current protests mean for Russia's future.

Viacheslav Egorov, who blogs as jurist_egorov, discussed the recent violence in a post [ru] titled, “Who Scares the Authorities?” exploring possible motives for what he believes was excessive police force:

Чего она боится, заставляя полицию применять слезоточивый газ, избивать митингующих, задерживать спокойно сидящих на земле оппозиционеров Навального и Удальцова, задерживать сейчас спокойно митингующих на «народных гуляниях» Алексея Навального и Ксению Собчак??? Чего боится Власть? Чего боится Король? Революции? Бунта уставшего народа? Так бунт неизбежен, если Власть будет так вести себя. Революция неизбежна, если Правительство (новое) и Король (старый новый) не станут прислушиваться к своему народу!!!

What are the authorities so afraid of that they force the police to use tear gas, to beat protesters, to detain the oppositionists Navalny and Udaltsov, who sat calmly on the ground, and now to detain Aleksei Navalny and Ksenia Sobchak as they protest calmly in the ‘people's walks'??? What are the authorities so afraid of? What is the King so afraid of? Revolution? A rebellion of Russia's weary people? Ah, but a rebellion is inevitable, if the authorities continue to behave as they have. And a revolution is inevitable, if the Government (the new one) and the King (the old-new one) don't learn to listen to their own people!!!

Blogger Nazavrik reviewed [ru] a controversial statement made by President Putin's Press Secretary, Dmitri Peskov, who said that police displayed too much self-control and should have used greater force against the May 6 protesters. Nazavrik posted photos of similar police measures used against crowds in Italy and Chile, arguing cynically that Moscow's police are increasingly eager to hone their skills studying the West's police history:

Он прав. У нашего омона пока ещё недостаточно опыта для разгона массовых мероприятий. На Западе давно уже отточены все действия по применению газа, резиновых пуль, провокаторов, водомётов и прочей спец.техники. На Западе в этом плане и законы жёстче и полномочий побольше. […] Но теперь, когда стабильность вновь воцариалась в стране, наш омон быстро нагонит зарубежных коллег и все приёмы, годами репетируемые на учениях, отработает на протестующих, действуя жёстко в угоду переживаниям Пескова.

[Peskov] is right. Our riot police still lack the experience to disperse mass public events. In the West, they have already fine-tuned the use of [tear] gas, rubber bullets, provocateurs, watercanons, and other special tactics. In the West, in this respect, the laws are stricter and the police powers are greater. […] Now, however, when stability in the country reigns again, our riot police will quickly overtake their colleagues abroad, and every technique they've spent years studying and rehearsing will be employed against the protesters, and done so severely, in order to allay Peskov's worries.

A Digital Delusion?

Other bloggers have pointed out that Moscow's street demonstrations are far from the concerns of average citizens, dismissing as hysteria rumors about “revolution.” In a reversal of the typical oppositionist claim that digital and citizen media breaks through censorship to reveal a truer picture of everyday life, Dmitri Kotukov argues [ru] that protesters have constructed a false reality by tweeting and writing endlessly about their adventures with the police:

Несколько дней практически не открывал ноутбук, не использовал айпад, короче как и положено в праздники - отдыхал. Сегодня открыл ленту и удивился. Читаю все эти надрывные истории о столкновениях непонятных людей с ОМОНом, какие-то нелепые призывы куда-то выйти, про марши миллионов-триллионов, революции […]. […] Что самое удивительное, эта видимость существует только в инете. В реалии люди отдыхают, радуются весне, гуляют, встречаются на праздники.

For a few days, I practically didn't open my laptop, didn't use my iPad, and — in short and as is appropriate during the holidays — I relaxed. Today I looked at the headlines and was surprised. I'm reading all these hysterical stories about clashes between these incomprehensible people and the police, about various absurd calls to march off somewhere, about million-man marches and trillion-man marches, [and] revolution […]. […] The most remarkable thing is that this illusion exists only on the Internet. In reality, people are relaxing, enjoying the spring, taking walks, and meeting for the holidays.

Saudi Arabia: Twitter Hacking Prevention Tips

Mohamed ElGohary — Tue, 08 May 2012 05:25:08 +0000

Online accounts are frequently hacked and stolen. We often hear of those who hacked someone's email or stole someone's email password. Twitter is no different, so the Saudi tweep and blogger Manal Al-Sherif, who has worked as a Information Security Consultant in an oil company for years, shared her tips on how to protect Twitter accounts from being hacked [ar].

Switzerland: An Initiative to Establish Basic Income for All

Vivienne Griffiths — Mon, 07 May 2012 20:42:02 +0000

An initiative to establish a new federal law known as “For an unconditional basic income” [fr] was formally introduced in Switzerland in April. The idea, which consists quite simply of giving a monthly income to all citizens that is neither means-tested nor work-related, has generated commentary throughout the Swiss blogosphere.

The Swiss referendum process is a system of direct democracy that enables citizens to call for legislative change at the federal or constitutional level.

If the initiative to introduce a basic income gathers more than 100,000 signatures before October 11, 2013, the Federal Assembly is required to look into it and can call a referendum if the initiative is judged to be credible.

: Swiss Francs by Flickr user Jim (CC BY-NC-SA 2.0).

On his blog, Pascal Holenweg explains what it's all about [fr]:

L'initiative populaire pour un revenu de base inconditionnel propose d'inscrire dans la constitution fédérale l'instauration d'une allocation universelle versée sans conditions devant permettre à l'ensemble de la population de mener une existence digne et de participer à la vie publique.

La loi règlerait le financement et fixerait le montant de cette allocation (les initiants la situent à 2000-2500 francs par mois, soit, grosso modo, le montant maximum de l'aide sociale actuelle, mais n'inscrivent pas ce montant dans le texte de l'initiative). Le revenu de base est inconditionnel : il n'est subordonné à aucune contre-prestation. Il est universel (tout le monde le touche) et égalitaire (tout le monde touche le même montant). Il est individuel (il est versé aux individus, pas aux ménages).

Il n'est pas un revenu de substitution à un revenu ou un salaire perdu. En revanche, il remplace tous les revenus de substitution (assurance chômage, retraite, allocations familiales, allocations d'étude, rentes invalidité) qui lui sont inférieurs. Comment le financer? Par l'impôt direct sur le revenu et la fortune, par l'impôt indirect sur la consommation (la TVA), par un impôt sur les transactions financières, et surtout par le transfert des ressources consacrées au financement de l'AVS, de l'AI, de l'aide sociale et des autres revenus de substitution inférieurs au montant du revenu de base.

The grassroots initiative “for an unconditional basic income” proposes that “the establishment of an unconditional universal benefit” be written into the federal constitution which would “allow the entire population to lead a dignified existence and participate in public life”.The law will address financing and set the amount of the benefit (the proposers suggest around 2,000-2,500 Swiss francs per month (or 2,200-2,700 US dollars per month), which is about the same as the maximum current social security payment, but they have not written this into the text of the initiative[fr]). The basic income does not come with any conditions attached: it is not subject to any means testing. It is universal (everyone will receive it) and egalitarian (everyone will receive the same amount). It is also personal (it is paid out to individuals, not households).It is not income to replace a lost salary. Rather, it replaces all inferior income support (unemployment benefit, pensions, family allowance, student grants, disability payments). How will it be financed? Through direct taxation of income and wealth, indirect taxation on consumption (VAT), taxing financial transactions, and most especially through the reallocation of resources currently allotted to financing state pensions and unemployment payouts, social security and other welfare payments lower than the amount of the basic income.

On his blog [fr], Fred Hubleur makes the point:

Le truc important, c’est que ce revenu est fixé pour toutes et tous sans qu’il n’y ait de contrepartie de travail ; oui, un revenu sans emploi. Cela peut choquer. Mais dans le fond c’est une idée parfaitement défendable. D’une part, on lutte ainsi contre la pauvreté et la précarité, plus besoins d’aides sociales en complément de revenus autres et des dizaines d’aides différentes et complexes à mettre en œuvre. Ce revenu inconditionnel est également un bon point pour l’innovation et la création. (…) On est aussi dans un nouveau paradigme qui peut effrayer les capitalistes acharnés : libérer l’Homme du travail et lui rendre son statut d’homo sapiens prévalant à celui d’homo travaillus qui a tellement cours dans notre société.

The important thing is that this revenue is fixed for everyone without there being a requirement to work; that's right, it is income without employment. This might seem shocking. But at its heart it is an entirely defensible idea. On the one hand, we are fighting against poverty and insecurity, there will no longer be a need for social security to bolster other incomes, and dozens of different and unwieldy benefits. This unconditional income is equally good news for innovation and creativity. (…) We have also made a paradigm shift that dyed-in-the-wool capitalists might find alarming: the liberation of working man, returning him to his status as homo sapiens over that of homo travaillus (ed's note: Homo travaillus is a play on word to describe the working man) which holds such sway in our society.

Martouf sets out a number of arguments in favour of a basic income [fr], as illustrated here:

: Human reason to work by freeworldcharter.org via active rain and adapted by Martouf in French with permission to repost

This new world vision has most notably been explored in the Helvetico-German film Basic Income: A Cultural Impetus, by Ennon Schmidt and Daniel Hani, two of the eight Swiss citizens founders of the initiative:

“And what would you do with a basic income?”

On the website of BIEN_Switzerland, the Swiss branch of the global network calling for a basic income, Internet users were asked the following question [fr]:

Voilà, ça y est, vous l'avez. Chaque mois vous recevez 2500 francs sans condition. Dites-nous en quoi votre vie a changé. Dites-nous ce que vous faites de votre temps. A quoi vous consacrez votre vie ?

So here it is. You receive 2,500 Swiss francs every month no strings attached. Tell us how your life would change. Tell us how you would spend your time. What would you devote your life to?

The responses were varied. Antoine would set up a restaurant. Gaetane a farm. Renaud would devote himself to music:

Mon premier projet serait de finir et de tenter de produire un instrument de musique que je suis en train de créer. Parallèlement à ça je proposerais des cours d'utilisation de mon instrument de musique préféré et peu connu dans la région

My first project would be to finish a musical instrument that I am in the process of creating and attempting to put it into production. At the same time I would offer lessons on how to play my favourite musical instrument, one which is not well known in this region.

User herfou70 would prioritise his family [fr]:

Je suis Père de famille (3 enfants - 6-11-14 ans) et suis le seul salairé de la famille. Disposer d'une revenu de base me permettrait de consacrer plus temps à mes enfants. Mon épouse pourrait également avoir une activité autre que celle qu'elle occupe dans le foyer, ce qui lui permettrait de plus s'épanouir

I am a father (3 children - 6, 11 and 14 years old) and I am the family's only earner. To have a basic income would allow me to devote more time to my children. My wife would also be able to do something outside of looking after our home, allowing her to grow and develop.

[a poster from the “revenu de base inconditionnel” initiative]

On Facebook, supporters of the basic income initiative have launched a competition [fr] called “star for life”. Visitors to the site are invited to take a photo of themselves as if they were sentenced to life.

A basic income will “do more harm than good”

But not everyone is convinced by the idea. According to Jean Christophe Schwaab, a member of Switzerland's lower house of representatives, socialists must not support the proposition, which he judges will “do more harm than good and be a disaster for employees”. He gave the following explanation on his blog [fr]:

Les partisans du revenu de base prétendent que ce revenu doit «libérer de l’obligation de gagner sa vie» et entraînerait la disparition des emplois précaires ou mal payés, car, puisque le revenu de base garantit le minimum vital, plus personnes ne voudra de ces emplois. Or, c’est probablement le contraire qui se produirait. Comme ces faibles montants ne suffiront pas à atteindre le premier objectif de l’initiative, à savoir garantir des conditions de vie décentes, leurs bénéficiaires seront obligés de travailler quand même, malgré le revenu de base. La pression d’accepter n’importe quel emploi ne disparaîtra donc pas.

Supporters of a basic income claim that it must “free people from the obligation of earning a living” and lead to the disappearance of unstable or poorly paid employment, because, as this basic income guarantees a minimum living wage, no one will want these jobs. Now, it's more than likely to produce the opposite effect. As the low level of the payouts will not be sufficient to satisfy the initiative's primary objective, namely ensure a decent standard of living, the beneficiaries will be obliged to work anyway, despite the basic income. The pressure to accept any available job will not go away.

He added:

Enfin, le revenu de base inconditionnel aurait pour grave défaut d’exclure définitivement bon nombre de travailleurs du marché du travail (dont on nierait alors le droit au travail): ceux dont on ne jugerait pas la capacité de gain suffisante (p. ex. en raison d’un handicap, de maladie ou de faibles qualifications) n’auraient qu’à se contenter du revenu de base.

Lastly, an unconditional basic income would, worst of all, permanently exclude a good number of workers from the job market (by denying their right to work): those who are judged to have insufficient earning potential (e.g. due to disability, illness or lack of qualifications) will just have to content themselves with the basic income.

His analysis is controversial, as can be seen from the comments thread under his post. From a French perspective, Jeff Renault explained why the left are “dead set against” [fr] an unconditional basic income:

La gauche de la fin du 19è et du 20è siècle s’est forgée autour de la valeur travail et la défense des travailleurs. Ce combat se retrouve dans la défense persistante du salariat et de son St. Graal, le CDI, alors même que ce “statut” ne concerne plus qu’une minorité de personnes.

The left of the end of the 19th and the 20th centuries was forged on the values of work and defending workers. This fight centres around the never ending defence of the salaried worker and the Holy Grail of permanent, salaried contracts, even through this “status” only applies to the minority.

With the launch of the initiative, Hubleur hopes [fr] that a great societal debate will open up in Switzerland:

Ce sera au moins la porte ouverte à un grand débat de société et l’occasion de réfléchir à ce que l’on veut et à quelle vie on aspire. Ce système d’allocation universelle (ou autres noms), ça fait un moment que je le suis, je me souviens qu’on en avait parlé dans des cours sur la précarité et le lien social il y a une dizaine d’années à l’université. Le principe est franchement séduisant et mérite qu’on s’y arrête.

Quand on voit le monde que nous donne le système capitaliste et productiviste actuel, on peut bien se prendre à rêver d’autre chose, d’un monde laissant plus de chances à chacune et chacun.

This will at least open the door to a great societal debate and the chance to reflect on what we want and to what kind of life we aspire. I've been following the idea of a universal benefit system (amongst other names) for a while. I remember talking about it in a class on instability and social ties a decade ago at university. The idea is frankly very seductive and deserves a closer look.When you look at the world created through the current capitalist, productivist model, you could easily end up longing for something else, for a world that gives everyone a better chance.

Russia: Violence Plunges Opposition into Debate About Tactics

Kevin Rothrock — Mon, 07 May 2012 18:17:13 +0000

Yesterday, the Russian opposition's mass protests against Vladimir Putin for the first time produced mass violence. Dozens of protesters and police officers alike reported injuries, with several on each side requiring hospitalization.

The countless aspects and minutia of Moscow's “Million Man March” (which attracted about a tenth of that many people, according to the very highest estimates) are already the subject of immeasurable debate, which generally orbits the question of responsibility for the fighting. Why did yesterday's rally at Bolotnaia Square, the site of two previous peaceful demonstrations, end with blood spilled and Muscovites brawling?

One of the most important sticking points in the interpretation of events has been organizer Sergei Udaltsov's decision to conduct a sit-in outside the Square, which some call a provocation and others believe to have been a necessary response to police force.

Journalist and popular blogger Oleg Kashin published an article [ru] hours after the violence, endorsing the sit-in, and thanking Udaltsov and Aleksei Navalny (who also participated) for injecting the protest movement with new energy. In the article, Kashin compared the opposition's situation to that of the protagonist of the 1994 Russian film “Burnt by the Sun“, where a naive Soviet general is betrayed by Stalinism and arrested by the secret police.

The hero of that movie had behaved as though the state was just, right up until he had his face bashed in by a NKVD agent. By abandoning the usual moderate speakers of past demonstrations, Kashin argues that the “Million Man March” succeeded in revealing the true nature of today's Russian authorities:

Но что знаю точно — что если бы это был митинг, как в марте на Пушкинской или на Новом Арбате, мне было бы за него стыдно, хоть я к нему и не имел никакого отношения. Но Удальцов, Навальный и прочие сели на асфальт, и, благодаря этому, мне теперь стыдно за то, что меня не было рядом с ними.

But I know for certain that, if [the usual speakers] had been at the rally (like they were in March at Pushkin Square or at Novyi Arbat), then I'd be ashamed for them, even though I wasn't involved. But Udaltsov, Navalny, and others sat on the pavement, and because of that I'm ashamed because I wasn't out there beside them.

Kashin's attitude, the embrace of more confrontational tactics, is shared by many, including perennial dissident and controversial figure Eduard Limonov, who declared [ru] in his LiveJournal relievedly, “At last the protest [movement] has radicalized,” concluding, “After what happened today, there's no longer any doubt (in case anyone still had some) that a Revolution is underway in Russia.”

Oppositionist blogger and favorite of Navalny's, Vladislav Naganov, exceeded his own typically alarmist tone when he titled his most recent blog post [ru], “This Is War,” comparing yesterday's clashes to the Nazi invasion of the USSR in 1941.

In a comment [ru] on the website Snob.ru, typically oppositionist Elena Panfilova, the director of Transparency International Russia, challenged demonstration leaders' version of events, claiming that the sit-in was clearly planned in advance, and not in response to police restricting access into Bolotnaia Square:

[…] немаленькой группы людей, был план продемонстрировать свою силу, показать, что они могут делать все, что считают нужным. […] Я пришла как наблюдатель от Общественной палаты и увидела, как огромное количество людей, пройдя всю Якиманку, поворачивает на Болотную. И на повороте стало видно, что организованные колонны остановились посредине моста и не сворачивают. Их обтекали справа и слева “неорганизованные”, а они стояли. В этот момент стало ясно, что у стоящих людей есть план: продемонстрировать силу протестного движения […].

[…] it was a small group's plan to demonstrate their own strength and show that they can do everything they think necessary. […] I was there as an observer from the Public Chamber, and I saw the large number of people coming down Yakimanka Street and turning down Bolotnaia. At the intersection, it became clear that organized columns of people had stopped in the middle of the [Malyi Kamennyi] Bridge and weren't turning off. To the right and the left, ‘unorganized' [protesters] were walking around them, but these columns of people just stood there. At this moment, it became clear that those standing had a plan: demonstrate the strength of the protest movement […].

“They deceived people!” Panfilova explained, criticizing the rally's organizers for deliberately staging a scene that would flood the crowd with “adrenaline.”

Russian celebrity and recent oppositionist figure Ksenia Sobchak also weighed in on the sit-in, despite not attending yesterday's rally. “I'll say openly,” she wrote [ru] in her blog, “why I decided not to go: because I knew in advance that the main objective would be standing on the bridge, charging the police lines, and conducting a sit-in.”

Echoing Panfilova's critique, Sobchak affirmed her commitment to peaceful resistance and gradual “perestroika,” rejecting the radicalization of protest tactics.

The events of Moscow's “Million Man March,” which clearly divide oppositionists and pro-Kremlin activists, will also exacerbate the internal frictions among the anti-Putin protesters. That prominent figures are openly contesting the merit of more confrontational methods is proof of the opposition's commitment to transparent discussion, but fissures this ‘radicalization' is already aggravating could prove more weakening than empowering.

Ksenia Sobchak, for her part, maintains hope in the salvation powers of the Internet, writing on LiveJournal, “Please, Mother of God, send Putin a computer — it's the last chance we've got.”

Belgium: Video Shows Campaign to Curb Texting and Driving

Juliana Rincón Parra — Mon, 07 May 2012 14:43:43 +0000

The Impossible texting and driving test is part of a campaign to raise awareness to the dangers of texting using mobile devices while driving in Belgium. Several young people doing their behind the wheel driving test were surprised to know there was a new test section requiring them to text while driving. The dashboard cam tells the story of how these young people faced this new part of the test.

Cambodia Inventions

Mong Palatino — Fri, 04 May 2012 10:11:01 +0000

Angkor Car, The Peacehammer, Recycled Biodiesel, Affordable Water Pumps, Moonlight. These are some of the unique inventions from Cambodia and Asia Life Guide was able to interview the inventors.