Over the recent years, the structure of the world has changed. Forces of globalization and the growing internationalization of key political and social economic issues have increased the interconnectivity of the world. The forces of globalization and internationalization have been made possible by the technological and communication advancements that have been realized in the past century (McLaughlin, 2010, p.22). One of the key technological advancement that has increased world connectivity has been the internet. People from various parts of the world can be able to communicate and share ideas about different subjects and fields. Though the interconnectivity of the world seems like an improvement in the conduction of transactions across the globe, the fact remains that it has its own shortcoming.
For the purposes of this piece, it’s important to narrow down to talk specifically about the internet. Internet connection has been advantages in the corporate world in the sharing of information, skills, and has been a source of entrepreneurship and innovation. These similar advantages are also reflected in the political strata of society. Evidently, it has been through the internet that ideologies regarding to governance and democracy are shared among people within other nations that possess different form of governance. The Jazzman revolution often referred to as the Arab Spring, which faces North Africa, was as a result of the sharing of information and ideological perspectives through the internet. One thing to understand that the role of the internet within the globe is a macro-level idea about the implications that internet can have to society. This means that the benefits, which are associated with the internet from the perspective of the international system can be equate to the role of the same in shaping domestic politics. Based on this background about the importance of the internet both at an international level and also at domestic levels, I would like to explain the reasons why a move to shut down the internet would not be the most advisable thing to do. There are five main arguments which support this standpoint.
First of all, the escalation of social strife is not a phenomenon that occurs sporadically. Instead, most social conflicts and strife are premeditated. This would mean that crimes and author activities that threatened the security of a nation are usually already planned before the happen. The government’s take and concern that the internet is in some instances used in the planning of crime is true. However, the fact remains that shutting down the internet does not address the root of the problem. Instead of government focusing on the shutting down the internet, they should improve their technology such that they can be able to track criminal pacts and arrangement that are being planned at a given area at a particular time. It is through the internet that government intelligence agencies can be in a position to identify networks between perpetuators of crime (Thornberry and Krohn, 2005, p.24). One thing that is worth noting is that the art of committing crime in today’s world is highly organized. This means that clues to a chain of people conducting a given criminal activity is difficult. Manual intelligence in most cases leads to disappointment of security persons especially if they are dealing with criminals or other persons to keep their movement and ways water-tight. Therefore, in the wake of today’s paradigm of highly organized crime, which is highly specialized in networks, it is important that the government uses the internet as a way to monitor security, but not a way in which to avoid spread of information. In so doing, government will be able to move from the traditional notions of security preservation in the state, to the new paradigm of security that involves the use of advanced technology.
Second, it is worth noting that the conceptualization of security has in recent years changed. In the traditional sense, aggressors to the state were considered to be other states or insurgent forces within the state. This is the traditional notion of security. However, non-state actors remain to be the largest threats of the state. Unlike, state actors to officially declare conflict with another nation, non-state actors are unpredictable (McLaughlin, 2010, p.19). This means that their intentions are concealed and are not physically identifiable. However, through enhancement of better internet surveillance with the state, the actions of non-state actors that might create social strife and unrest within the state can be identified and tracked down.
The third important argument to bear in mind is the fact that the shutting down of the internet by government in the case if social unrest has economic implications. There are very many businesses and other economic endeavors that independent on the internet. This would mean that shutting the internet for security reasons who negatively affect the economy since it would disrupt the operations of economic sectors that are reliant on the internet (Siegel and Senna, 2009, p.56). One thing to realize is that employment remains a sensitive issue that resonates with the electorate. Therefore, the adoption of a security measure that would adversely affect a tool of commerce such as the internet would have a negative implication on the incumbency.
In conclusion, it is necessary that the government does not adopt a policy of shutting down the internet during times of socio-political strife. This is because the internet can be a good way to track down the chains and networks of individuals and organizations used in the perpetuation of crime. In addition, shutting down the internet has negative implications on the economy because there are many businesses and industries that are dependent on the internet for their operations.
References
Bryant, C. D., & Peck, D. L. (2007). 21st century sociology: a reference handbook. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.
McLaughlin, E. (2010). The SAGE handbook of criminological theory. Los Angeles: SAGE.
Siegel, L. J., & Senna, J. J. (2009). Essentials of criminal justice (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.
Thornberry, T. P., & Krohn, M. D. (2003). Taking stock of delinquency: an overview of findings from contemporary longitudinal studies. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
