Archive for the ‘Widerstand’ Category

Global: Don’t worry about your Government

Sonntag, August 3rd, 2014

“Civil Liberties in the Digital Age

08/01/2014 | Civil Liberties in the Digital Age

By Jay Stanley, Senior Policy Analyst, ACLU Speech, Privacy & Technology Project at 1:18pm

In the first half of the 20th century, Americans gained a new awareness of the malleability and manipulability of the human mind, and the result was a wave of concern over “propaganda” and other techniques of influence. Today we may be seeing a new wave of similar fears as we begin to wonder whether the ways we use and rely upon technology today are making us susceptible to new, dangerous forms of manipulation.

The first wave, in the 20th century, resulted from a number of factors. These included the discovery of a passionate, irrational unconscious by Freud and Jung, and a reaction against the seemingly mindless march toward slaughter in World War I, both of which fed into a broader disillusionment with the enlightenment rationalism of the 19th century and its faith that humans were ultimately orderly, rational beings. Other factors included the increasingly modernized advertising industry and its surprising success in manipulating consumers, and later the use of propaganda techniques by the fascists and communists in Europe.

The sudden awareness of human vulnerability to manipulation was embraced by some, but also sparked fears that the government would use it to control the beliefs of the population, rather than reflect those beliefs as it should in a democracy. Edward Bernays, considered the “father of public relations,” wrote a highly influential 1928 book entitled Propaganda, in which he argued that human manipulability was a good thing . He wrote,

    “The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of.”

Bernays had the unrestrained faith in expertise and government that was characteristic of the era’s Progressives, but many were not so sanguine. In the first decade of the 20th century, fierce controversy and opposition was sparked by the hiring of press agents by government agencies (first by the Panama Canal Commission and then by the Forest Service and other agencies). In 1913 Congress banned the executive branch from using funds to employ “any publicity expert.” Later that decade Congress also enacted the Anti-Lobbying Act of 1919, which barred agencies from using funds “intended or designed to influence in any manner a Member of Congress to favor or oppose, by vote or otherwise, any legislation or appropriation by Congress.”

These acts were largely unsuccessful. During World War I, the government created a Committee on Public Information, an agency founded for the explicit purpose of making the U.S. public enthusiastic about entering the war through propaganda techniques. In the 1920s, after public sentiment shifted toward the view that involvement in the war was a mistake, many viewed this agency as part of the problem.

Concern and controversies were still roiling after the Second World War. In 1947, for example, the Pentagon launched a launched a large-scale lobbying and public relations effort on behalf of Truman’s proposal to institute the draft, prompting an investigation into the issue by a House subcommittee, which charged in its report that the War Department and its employees had “gone beyond the limits of their proper duty of providing factual information to the people and the Congress and have engaged in propaganda supported by taxpayers’ money to influence legislation now pending before the Congress.”

In 1948, Congress enacted the Smith Mundt Act, which authorized the State Department to work to influence the attitudes and opinions of populations overseas via the Voice of America—but also banned the use of funds “to influence public opinion in the United States.”

A new wave of concern?

Concern over manipulation by government and companies has never really gone away, with fresh controversies emerging periodically, but today we may be seeing a whole new wave of concern—and of reason to be worried. There have been several stories in recent months highlighting ways that today’s technology could be used to manipulate and control. Foremost among them was the uproar over “experimentation” by Facebook, which manipulated the “mood” of posts seen by some users to see if it affected the happiness or sadness of the content posted by those users. An echo of the controversy took place a few weeks later when OKCupid wrote about its own experiments on users.

Not long after the Facebook story broke, Glenn Greenwald reported that the British spy agency GCHQ had developed a suite of methods and tools for manipulating internet content, such as spreading disinformation, manipulating the results of online polls, inflating pageview counts, and amplifying or suppressing content on YouTube.

The Facebook revelation sparked an immense amount of discussion, much of it focused upon things like informed consent, ethical oversight, Institutional Review Boards, and the potential effects on particular people such as depression sufferers (for example see these critical pieces and this defense of Facebook which, though ultimately unpersuasive, does a clear job explaining how Facebook filters content). But the most trenchant analyses looked past the ethics of experimentation to broader questions: what does this incident tell us about the growing power of institutions to manipulate and control individuals?

As Kate Crawford pointed out in the Atlantic,

    “some truly difficult questions lie in wait: What kinds of accountability should apply to experiments on humans participating on social platforms? Apart from issues of consent and possible harm, what are the power dynamics at work? And whose interests are being served by these studies?”

Putting her finger on what I think was the most significant thing about this story, she writes that it gives us a glimpse of “how highly centralized power can be exercised.”

Similarly, Zeynep Tufekci, writes,

    “these large corporations (and governments and political campaigns) now have new tools and stealth methods to quietly model our personality, our vulnerabilities, identify our networks, and effectively nudge and shape our ideas, desires and dreams. These tools are new, this power is new and evolving…. I identify this model of control as a Gramscian model of social control: one in which we are effectively micro-nudged into “desired behavior”…. Seduction, rather than fear and coercion are the currency, and as such, they are a lot more effective.”

The new wave of consciousness over our potential to be manipulated and controlled may also include the network neutrality issue, which is in great part about such fears.

There are two lessons we could learn from looking back at the earlier history of such fears. One could be that we’ll get over this as we did fears around advertising manipulation, and today’s new concerns will come to seem quaint as do some of the old ones. But a better lesson, I would argue, is that the fears that were identified last century were for the most part entirely legitimate and well-founded, that “techniques of influence” have been abused in many ways—not least by playing a key role in some of the greatest catastrophes of the 20th century—and now we have a new reason to worry and to insist upon checks and balances as our government uses technology in new ways, and as we allow manipulable technologies like Facebook to become ever-more-central to the way we communicate, gather information, and relate to others.”

 

(Quelle: ACLU.)

Brasilien: Nicht nur Fußball, Samba, Caipirinha

Mittwoch, Juli 2nd, 2014
 

WM_Brasilien.jpg

Texte unter anderem zu:

• Vor der WM ist nach der WM: südafrikanische Erfahrungen werfen ihre Schatten voraus

• Fußball als Massenkultur

• Brasilien 2014: Wo steht die neue Supermacht?

• Fußball und Protest: Juni 2013 und die Folgen

• Gentrifizierung macht vor dem Rasensport nicht halt

Die Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung stellt dieses Buch hier kostenlos zum Herunterladen zur Verfügung.

“Dieses Buch wird unter den Bedingungen einer Creative Commons License veröffentlicht: Creative Commons Attribution-Non- Commercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Germany License (abrufbar unter www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/legalcode). Nach dieser Lizenz dürfen Sie die Texte für nichtkommerzielle Zwecke vervielfältigen, verbreiten und öffentlich zugänglich machen unter der Bedingung, dass die Namen der Autoren und der Buchtitel inkl. Verlag genannt werden, der Inhalt nicht bearbeitet, abgewandelt oder in anderer Weise verändert wird und Sie ihn unter vollständigem Abdruck dieses Lizenzhinweises weitergeben. Alle anderen Nutzungsformen, die nicht durch diese Creative Commons Lizenz oder das Urheberrecht gestattet sind, bleiben vorbehalten.
Das gedruckte Buch ist bei VSA: Verlag erhältlich.

© VSA: Verlag 2014, St. Georgs Kirchhof 6, 20099 Hamburg
240 Seiten | mit Farbfotos | EUR 16,80

ISBN 978-3-89965-595-7 ”

 

(Quelle: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung)

BRD: Projekt Münchhausen gegen Kriegslügen

Montag, März 31st, 2014

“Projekt Münchhausen

Jeder Stifter einer Weltreligion verhieß Frieden, und zwar im Diesseits, zu erreichen durch Toleranz, Barmherzigkeit, Menschlichkeit. Staatsgründer taten es ihnen gleich und schrieben in ihre Grundgesetze: All men are created equal (Unabhängigkeitserklärung der USA). Großartige, kluge Worte. Und doch ist die menschliche Geschichte geprägt von Gewalt und Krieg, deren Beute von wenigen eingesackt wurde und dessen Leid von den Vielen getragen werden musste.

Wie gelang es und gelingt es in fast allen Gesellschaftsformationen, die Menschen gegeneinander in Stellung und zu Mord und Totschlag zu bringen und dies noch als gute und ehrenvolle Taten zu verkaufen? Die Massenmörder schrieben und schreiben die Geschichte, sie ließen sich den Titel ‚Der Große’ zumessen, und der Tod auf dem Schlachtfeld wurde zum Heldentod verklärt, während die ‚Kollateralschäden’ ignoriert wurden. Interessen obsiegen über Ethik und Moral.

Das Projekt Münchhausen fordert alle auf, die Geschichten der großen und kleinen Kriegslügen zu erzählen, mit denen die Menschen zur Gewalt gegen einander verführt wurden – von den Kreuzzügen, über den angeblich Gerechten Krieg, den Tonking-Zwischenfall an den Küsten Vietnams, bis zur dreisten Lüge des US-Außenministers über die Atombomben des Saddam Hussein und dem Militär als letztem Mittel der angeblich Humanitären Intervention?

Wir müssen uns befreien von dem Spinnengewebe der Lügen und Legitimationsideologien, die unsere Mitmenschen zu Feinden und Feindbildern und uns zu Gewalt gegen sie in der globalisierten Gesellschaft machen wollen. Das Projekt Münchhausen soll dazu einen Beitrag leisten. (…)

• Die Lügengeschichte des Monats März

Es begann mit einer Lüge – Kosovo-/Jugoslawienkrieg 1999

• Die Lügengeschichte des Monats Februar

Münchhausen und die Bundeswehr in Mali

• Weitere Lügengeschichten

Krieg gerecht gelogen

1990 – Lügen am Golf 1990

1964 – Der Zwischenfall von Tonking oder wie man einen erwünschten Krieg inszeniert

1867/68 – Der Krieg des britischen Empire gegen den Kaiser von Äthiopien

 

(Quelle: Aachener Friedensmagazin Aixpaix.de)

Israel / Palästina: … und KEINEr geht hin!

Montag, März 10th, 2014

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
2014-03-08

50 Young Israelis Send a Letter to Netanyahu:
“We Refuse to Serve in the Occupation Army”

Yesterday morning, dozens of young Israelis sent Prime Minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, a letter in which they declared their refusal to serve in the Israeli military[*]. This is the largest group of Israeli draft refusers in the history of Israel; it is the first act of its kind in five years, but follows a long tradition of communal conscientious objection. The current Israeli government is trying to widen the army draft to all ethnic groups within Israel against their will and young people from all over the country are reacting by refusing to serve in the Israeli Army.
The purpose of this statement is to protest against the ongoing occupation of Palestinian territories where, according to the signatories “human rights are violated and acts defined by international law as war-crimes are perpetuated on a daily basis.” They are also protesting the way in which the army influences civilian life, deepening the sexism, militarism, violence, inequality and racism present in Israeli society.
Mandy Cartner, a 16 years old signatory from Tel Aviv said: `The actions of the army distance us from finding a solution and from creating peace, justice and security. My refusal is a way of expressing my opposition to the wrongs done daily in our name and through us.`
Shaked Harari, a 17 years old signatory from Bat Yam, said: `The army serves the people in power and not the civilians, who are only a tool. My friends and I refuse to be cannon fodder.`
Roni Lax, a 20 year old signatory from Bnei Brak: “We stand in solidarity with the ultra-orthodox youth and the Arab youth – Christian and Druze, some of whom are currently in an army prison.”

Contact Info:

Dafna Rothstein Landman – 0522470123 – dafna.e.r.l@gmail.com

Itamar Bellaiche – 0547484248 – itabellaiche@gmail.com

[*] The following is their statement:

`We, citizens of the state of Israel, are designated for army service.

We appeal to the readers of this letter to set aside what has always been taken for granted and to reconsider the implications of military service.
We, the undersigned, intend to refuse to serve in the army and the main reason for this refusal is our opposition to the military occupation of Palestinian territories. Palestinians in the occupied territories live under Israeli rule though they did not choose to do so, and have no legal recourse to influence this regime or its decision-making processes. This is neither egalitarian nor just. In these territories, human rights are violated, and acts defined under international law as war-crimes are perpetuated on a daily basis. These include assassinations (extrajudicial killings), the construction of settlements on occupied lands, administrative detentions, torture, collective punishment and the unequal allocation of resources such as electricity and water. Any form of military service reinforces this status quo, and, therefore, in accordance with our conscience, we cannot take part in a system that perpetrates the above-mentioned acts.
The problem with the army does not begin or end with the damage it inflicts on Palestinian society. It infiltrates everyday life in Israeli society too: it shapes the educational system, our workforce opportunities, while fostering racism, violence and ethnic, national and gender-based discrimination.
We refuse to aid the military system in promoting and perpetuating male dominance. In our opinion, the army encourages a violent and militaristic masculine ideal whereby `might is right`. This ideal is detrimental to everyone, especially those who do not fit it. Furthermore, we oppose the oppressive, discriminatory, and heavily gendered power structures within the army itself.
We refuse to forsake our principles as a condition to being accepted in our society. We have thought about our refusal deeply and we stand by our decisions.
We appeal to our peers, to those currently serving in the army and/or reserve duty, and to the Israeli public at large, to reconsider their stance on the occupation, the army, and the role of the military in civil society. We believe in the power and ability of civilians to change reality for the better by creating a more fair and just society. Our refusal expresses this belief.
For details:

Dafna Rothstein Landman – 0522470123 – dafna.e.r.l@gmail.com

Itamar Bellaiche – 0547484248 – itabellaiche@gmail.com ”

 

(Quelle: Occupation Magazin)

Europa: Lernfähig?

Freitag, Dezember 13th, 2013

“Wir bleiben dabei – Frieden schaffen ohne Waffen

Jeder Krieg ist eine Niederlage der Menschheit

Die Friedensbewegung wird im Jahr 2014 den historischen Jahrestag mit kritischem Rückblick und kreativen Aktionen begleiten. Wir werden nicht zulassen, dass aus dem Jahrestag 1914 2014 ein unkritisches Jahrhundertjubiläum gemacht und einzig die Europäische Union als zivile Friedensmacht gefeiert wird.

Heute fließen riesige Summen Geldes und immenses Potential menschlicher Arbeit und Intelligenz in die Rüstung. Das Ziel der Vereinten Nationen, künftige Generationen vor Krieg zu bewahren wird durch sogenannte humanitäre Einsätze konterkariert. Deutschland baut die Bundeswehr von der Verteidigungsarmee zur Armee im weltweiten Einsatz um. Als drittgrößter Waffenexporteur befeuert Deutschland weltweit Konflikte und lässt zu, dass Atomwaffen modernisiert werden statt sie endgültig zu verschrotten. Notwendig wäre hingegen, den Blick auf die Herausforderungen der Zukunft zu lenken: auf den Abbau von Ungleichheit und Armut ebenso wie auf den Aufbau von Infrastruktur und Gesundheitsfürsorge. Denn während Milliarden für Rüstung ausgegeben werden stirbt weltweit jede Minute ein Mensch an Hunger und jeder sechste Mensch hat keinen Zugang zu sauberem Trinkwasser.

Die Friedensbewegung wird 2014 Anstoß geben, aus den beiden Weltkriegen und dem Systemstreit des Kalten Krieges Schlussfolgerungen für eine Friedenspolitik im Zeitalter der Globalisierung zu ziehen. Es ist eine Herausforderung für alle, die Vernunft in den Dienst friedlicher Konfliktlösungsstrategoen zu stellen: für Soziale Bewegungen, Wissenschaft, Jugendverbände, Gewerkschaften und Religionen genauso wie für die internationale Staatengemeinschaft, für Europa, für Parlamente, Regierungen und Parteien.

 

Befragen Sie Geschichte und Gegenwart!
Woran scheitern Friedensprozesse heute? Was sollte gestoppt was neu entwickelt werden? Bringen Sie Ihre Ideen und Fähigkeiten ein, politisch, künstlerisch, wissenschaftlich wo immer Ihre Kompetenzen und Interessen liegen.

Es geht um Schritte zum Frieden!
Wie erreichen wir eine Zukunft ohne Waffen und Militär? Nennen Sie die Herausforderungen des Friedens beim Namen! Informieren Sie sich über Friedensprojekte in aller Welt!

Helfen Sie mit, aus dem Jahr 2014 hier und weltweit ein Jahr der Friedenskultur zu machen.

Werden Sie aktiv für eine Welt ohne Krieg und werben Sie für Abrüstung und zivile Konfliktbearbeitung, Gewaltfreiheit und Völkerrecht.

Werden Sie aktiv, um ein Klima des Friedens hier und weltweit zu schaffen und jeder Form von Militarismus eine Absage zu erteilen.

Der Kreativität sind keine Grenzen gesetzt

Auf www.1914-2014.eu ist Platz für neue Ideen. Anmelden unter info@1914-2014.eu. Projekte und Aktionsideen mit anderen teilen.

Frieden ist international und vernetzt

Wir unterstützen die großen Friedensveranstaltungen im Juni 2014 in Sarajewo.

Friedenskultur unterm Brandenburger Tor
Konzert und Vernetzungstreffen im Sommer 2014 in Berlin.

Orte des Gedenkens

Die Heldendenkmäler, die nach 1918 entstanden, sind für uns Orte für Protest und Gegeninformation. Das Antikriegs-Symbol des zerbrochenen Gewehrs ist eine Möglichkeit, an historischen Plätzen neue Denk-Male zu schaffen.

Informationsveranstaltungen

… Diskussionen, Filmabende, Stadtführungen, Besuche von Gedenkstätten und Gräbern für die Auseinandersetzung mit der Geschichte ist Ihre Phantasie gefragt.
Schaffen wir 2014 viele Orte an denen Jung und Alt die Friedensstrategien der Zukunft entwickeln können!”

 

(Quelle: Netzwerk 2014.)

USA: No-drone Zones

Dienstag, Oktober 1st, 2013

“Map: Is Your State a No-Drone Zone?

Nine states have already passed laws restricting drone use. See where yours stands.

By Dana Liebelson | Mon Sep. 30, 2013 3:00 AM PDT

In less than two years, the United States will open its commercial airspace to drones, allowing these “unmanned aerial vehicles” to zip over American cities along with planes and helicopters. Tech enthusiasts, entrepreneurs, and law enforcement agencies are intrigued by the possibilities—burrito drones! And the roughly $6-billion-a-year drone industry has launched a lobbying offensive to ensure Federal Aviation Administration regulations are as broad and permissive as possible. But lawmakers and civil liberties groups are concerned about the privacy implications and potential safety issues, and at least nine states have passed laws restricting drone use by law enforcement, private citizens, or both.

While drones were never banned in the United States, up until now their use has been strictly limited, with the FAA distributing a few hundred permits to researchers and law enforcement. But Congress has ordered the agency to open commercial airspace to a wide variety of unmanned vehicles by late 2015. And when it does, drones are bound to proliferate. The FAA anticipates there could be as many as 30,000 drones hurtling through US airspace by 2020.

Civil liberties advocates worry this trend could lead to abuses, with law enforcement agencies conducting unnecessary surveillance, especially given the lack of federal regulation governing the use of drones for law enforcement purposes. (At this point, it’s not even clear whether police need a warrant to collect data on people using drones). “It’s a core value in our society that the government doesn’t watch us and collect information about innocent people,” says Allie Bohm, an advocacy and policy strategist for the ACLU. “We need rules so that we can enjoy the benefits of this technology without becoming closer to a surveillance state.”

Politicians on both sides of the aisle share these concerns, and the FAA has promised it will take them into consideration during the rulemaking process. It plans to test privacy practices as part of its six-state pilot program, which will begin after the sites are chosen later this year. In the mean time, states are forging ahead with legislation that bars police from using drones, or at least using them without a warrant. A few states, including Texas, have also passed laws restricting private citizens from taking photos or videos with drones, while allowing law enforcement and other groups, such as licensed real estate brokers, to do so.

Our map above — which we will continue to update, with help from the National Conference of State Legislatures and the ACLU — shows which states have passed laws restricting drone use. Other states have drone legislation pending, so check with your legislature to see if a surveillance drone is coming to your hometown anytime soon.”

 

DANA LIEBELSONDANA LIEBELSON, Reporter

Dana Liebelson is a reporter in Mother Jones’ Washington bureau. Her work has also appeared in The Week, TIME’s Battleland, Truthout, OtherWords and Yahoo! News.

 

(Quelle: Mother Jones.com)

Nachtrag

Siehe auch:

US-Army-Drohnen über Bayern