The Internet and Dissent in Authoritarian States

Fielder, James D.

doi:10.1201/b15253-11

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the eyes of the Government, however, cyber-dissidents may refer to a group of internet users who are critical of the Party-state and its ideologies, policies or practices (Lagerkvist, 2005). Such criticism or disapproval of the Government ordinarily occurs when individuals are threatened with costs they cannot bear, following real-life events that outrage their sense of justice, or when individuals gain the resources necessary to challenge compliance (Fielder, 2012). To this end, I have confined my examination by defining cyber dissidents as individuals who engage in the following politically risky conduct: (1) expressing their political views, which are at odds with the Party's ideological discourses; (2) seeking to advocate for human rights under international law; (3) spreading news and information that is repugnant to the image of the Party and its leaders; and (4) organizing mass protests and public gatherings on online platforms.…”

Section: Data Collection and Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk, political security and extra-judicial penality under Xi

2023

Theoretical Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In authoritarian regimes, risk tends to be politically positioned to reflect the ruling party's interests, needs and priorities. In this article, I focus on the People's Republic of China (China) as a case study to isolate the issue of risk, and more specifically, analyse why risk is framed as a political tenet, what becomes the evidence of such risk, and how it relates to the country's legal approach to maintaining political stability in the Xi Jinping era. This article critically scrutinizes the latest political dynamics and police practices to argue that China has formulated an extra-judicial penal jurisprudence through what I call ‘forward-leaning’ policing (前倾式警务) against those who are perceived to present a threat of political harm. By using data on 2226 cyber-dissident cases during 2014–2021, my analysis points to this ‘warrior style’ policing being an intensified application of coercive police actions, which is heavily weighted towards incarceration as the main approach to addressing political dissent, especially through administrative detention. In doing so, the judicial process that traditionally determines conviction and sentencing is either circumvented or reduced to symbolic significance.

show abstract

Section: Data Collection and Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk, political security and extra-judicial penality under Xi

2023

Theoretical Criminology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

The Internet and Dissent in Authoritarian States

Cited by 1 publication

References 0 publications

Risk, political security and extra-judicial penality under Xi

Risk, political security and extra-judicial penality under Xi

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About