7 ms·
I wrote a rather lengthy thesis on Russian data localization and how it plays a role in the country's information security doctrine.[1] The push for data local
by TurkishPoptart 5y ago
I wrote a rather lengthy thesis on Russian data localization and how it plays a role in the country's information security doctrine.[1]
The push for data localization in Russia was a response to the domination of Google, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn (the latter is blocked). The ideology here is state sovereignty; he who holds the data, has control. Pomerantsev is correct to say that Russia just doesn't want to play by foreign rules.
Data localization has the added effect of bolstering the IT industry as a whole in Russia and spurring data center construction, even in Siberia, where cooling isn't much of a concern. The legal effect is to maintain a database of Russian citizens' online activity on these western platforms in case the FSB wants to build a case against a dissident or suspected criminal.
Meanwhile you see since roughly 2008 a more ideologically hostile and "civilizational" discourse in Putin's speeches, those of his ultra-nationalist wing, and in some of their publications (look into Izborsky Club, and the writings of Alexander Prokhanov and Dugin). The Russian military doctrine and information security doctrines were later updated to prioritize shielding or protecting its populace from certain discourse and ideas (pro-LGBTQ, pro-democracy NGOs) and favoring a "patriotic" information sphere to uphold "spiritual and religious values".
So the ideological basis for this information security policy is to bolster the "Russian world/Russkiy Mir," an imagined community of individuals beyond Russia's borders, including former Soviet sphere citizens and ethnic Russians abroad.
And of course the utility in silencing the propagation of certain ideas and viewpoints is to minimize protests (the most destabilizing of which was likely Bolotnaya in 2011). So this ideology doesn't stop them from prohibiting or banning groups and discussion about Russia's biggest problem: corruption.
The concerning point for me as an American is that in the past two-ish years we've seen our social media companies turn more draconian with the censorship and cooperation with our intelligence agencies, especially since Jan 6th and what the Biden administration is calling "misinformation". The U.S. was the survivor of the Cold War for many reasons, but the most compelling of which was that America represented a far more moral, humanitarian, and tolerant society, especially compared to the unfree, amoral, and atheist superpower. I'm getting off topic here, but I think you can see what I'm getting at. Ideology matters, just as much as ideological consistency does.
[1]: https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773/42126 https://digital.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/handle/1773...
- justicezyx 5y ago> the most compelling of which was that America represented a far more moral, humanitarian, and tolerant society, especially compared to the unfree, amoral, and atheist superpower. > far more moral In what sense? As a nation, US conducted equally atrocious things inside and outside of its country. Korean war Vietnam Cuba invasion Capitalism exploitation on south American > humanitarian See above. > tolerant society Sure Aside tolerance, there isn't much superiority in USA from cold war.
- trasz 5y agoThere is one huge point that you both missed: after World War II, USSR was a mess. It lost half of its industrial infrastructure, IIRC. Meanwhile, the US profited greatly. This means the starting point for both was very different.
- justicezyx 5y agoSame for China. KMT moved majority of the intellectuals and wealth into Taiwan, and left the mainland with rubbish. If China and Russia chose a different route than what they did already, are there a plausible pathway for them to reach similar economic prosperity (let's put aside the political well being for a bit). My so far limited conclusion is: NO. There has no plausible path for Russia and China to achieve their economical growth without the brutality and sacrifices. The rapid industrialization requires centralized wealth. Those are not collected through the immoral and brutal colonization by the modern industrial nations. Those were not possible at the time when Russia and China start their industrialization. They unfortunately have to turn their brutality towards their own people.
- trasz 5y agoI agree, but I'd argue it's even more interesting why we even bother with this question in case of China and Russia, but never with USA, which was built in equally immoral way, by killing off the natives, stealing their land, and then kidnapping slaves to work it.