<![CDATA[Ara Balears in English - freedom]]> 10 <![CDATA[Governance and social networks]]> In the book Four Internets, researchers from the University of Southampton Kieron O’Hara and Wendy Hall analyze the different models we can find today regarding Internet governance. One of the most curious aspects they explain is the use of social networks in China. The first thing that surprises is that there is no direct supervision by the Chinese government on what is published, but rather the users themselves self-regulate. In order to avoid problems, users censor what directly attacks the regime, but also behaviors such as the dissemination of rumors or fake news. On the other hand, it is common to find complaints against the malfunction of public services or against corrupt behavior by local authorities.This internal criticism is not only tolerated, but it is a vital source of information for the Chinese regime. It is well known that one of the main problems of any authoritarian state is the lack of incentives for authorities to highlight and correct problems and dysfunctions. If a local organization has a corrupt leader, the supervisor of the area knows that if they report it, they will have to give multiple explanations that could jeopardize their own position. In the end, it is always much simpler to hide it and transmit an immaculate image of what is happening to the superior authorities, even if it is unreal. But this, repeated over and over again, ends up being the worst nightmare of any ruler: having to make decisions with a false image of the country. The Beijing regime has long known that tolerating criticism in these daily aspects and at the local level is the best antidote to this.This tolerance does not equate to recognizing a full exercise of freedom of expression in the country, but it shows us how social networks have a public function that works both for the regime and for the people. In our environment, this function is not so common, for other reasons, because complaints can go through official channels without many problems. What is indeed, unfortunately, common on our networks, in addition to photos of the neighbor's trip or the video of someone charging their phone with a potato, are rumors, bad news, and a lot of aggressiveness. Contents that are what generate the most profit for the owning companies because, unlike in China, social networks here do not have a public function. They are simply a big business.Both models have some positive aspects, but their orientation is perverse: to maintain the authoritarian regime, in the Chinese case, and to maintain a consumerist and hyper-accelerated society in ours. In the literature on this subject, the European Union has long been discussed as a third model that seeks to prioritize the general interest over the business interest, as it has done, for example, with the protection of personal data, which leads to constant confrontations with large North American tech companies. Despite resistance, the European protective model is gradually consolidating, it is imitated by other countries, and it would be good if it were strengthened in other matters, such as the use of AI. Taking advantage of the fact that May 9th is Europe Day, and seeing how the internal enemies of the EU are becoming increasingly vocal, it is not in vain to remember the values and strengths of our continent and, even, to show a certain pride in it.

]]> <![CDATA[To die when you want]]>

The obsession with death that exists from certain interpretations of religious creeds and now from the so-called ultra-agenda – more or less stale conservatism – is indeed worrying and revealing. According to Christian religion, we would be told that our life does not belong to us, and therefore it is not right to want to die or end it when we sensibly wish. Life is a kind of divine gift, of which we are only custodians, like a wonderful book that is not ours and which we must return more or less intact to the Librarian Above. This may be so, or it could be, but the truth is that we have no certainty that things respond to these parameters. In the end, God does not manifest himself, but priests do. 

]]> <![CDATA[Freedom in Mallorca]]> Parliament has just debated a proposal to restrict home purchases to non-residents. This initiative was particularly relevant given the dramatic housing crisis, and also somewhat unusual because, in times of chronic culture war, useful and concrete issues tend not to garner much interest. Political debate has long since detached itself from people's concerns and daily lives, preferring to roam comfortably in the dialectical stratosphere, which is more polished and requires little rigor or time.

]]> <![CDATA[Networks and freedom]]> In the midst of the debate about freedom, it's tempting to revisit the 5th century BC, during the great democratic revolution. War has empowered the demos And dialogue is a new strategy for reaching agreements. Power can no longer be limited to imposing reality. More equitable understandings are needed. Power is redistributed, society is rebalanced. Thus begins the great Sophist debate: the preeminence of Physis (natural law) or the Nomos (human law).

]]> <![CDATA[The sea will boil]]> The unbearable lightness of knowing what we think. The days leading up to Manacor have been intense. The sea has boiled, like a casserole in the oven, in the apocalyptic Ausiès-Marché style. The local cultural organization has canceled a conference on Chuetas and antisemitism because the speaker was to be the historian, and also self-proclaimed Zionist (that's how she describes herself, the label isn't mine), Laura Miró. The episode is incredibly complex, and nothing I say about it will escape accusations of being a Zionist or a Palestinian terrorist from supporters of both sides. I'm not aiming for neutrality. I want a free and sovereign Palestinian state. I'm disgusted by the genocide that the Israeli state is perpetrating against what some still cynically call "Holy Land." I don't want Israeli colonization of that territory, just as I don't want Spanish colonization of ours. Between the state and the oppressed people, my choice is clear. Cancellation is another matter entirely. It drives me crazy that we don't let someone speak, especially when we've already invited them to share their perspective (wasn't this the initial mistake?). If we've reached the point where we can't listen to each other, where we can't speak frankly, with all the nuances, all the complexities, and all the controversies in the world, then we've lost our way in this whole mess.

]]> <![CDATA[The court has released the accused in the fatal Son Banya accident.]]>

The judge of Palma's Investigative Court number 5 has ordered the man's release. arrested as alleged perpetrator of the fatal accident of last October 6th covers the town of Son Banya (Palma).

]]> <![CDATA[The infallible world]]> In his essay On freedom (1859), John Stuart Mill emphasized the importance of freedom of expression to combat an attitude as widespread as it is pernicious: the belief in the infallibility of the world. Broadly speaking, what Mill meant was that people normally doubt their own opinions, but we have very little trouble accepting what everyone else thinks. For example, most of us wouldn't dare claim that the immigrants we know are troubled people, but we uncritically accept the message that most of them are. Therefore, Mill tells us, it's always important to question even what everyone takes for granted, because the world is not infallible.

]]>