Electronic civil disobedience (ECD) is the use of information technology and the internet by protesters or participants to conduct civil disobedience actions. Protesters can challenge government or organizational policies by using digital platforms. This nonviolent demonstration method frequently involves hacking techniques, initiating distributed denial-of-service (DDoS) assaults, or disseminating confidential data to bring attention to or express a lack of satisfaction.
In recent times, the concept of civil disobedience in politics has experienced a notable shift, marked by the emergence of electronic civil disobedience around the mid-1990s. Electronic strategies have garnered growing attention, with activists and media outlets labeling them as emerging manifestations of civil disobedience.
Electronic civil disobedience originated from the concept of the streets being considered dead capital, which means unproductive assets, as introduced by Critical Art Ensemble in their 1996 publication. As the share of power has become more scattered and fluid, groups that engage in electronic civil disobedience suggest that resistance must adapt to this change. Stefan Wray, a member of Electronic Disturbance Theater (EDT), confidently asserted that electronic civil disobedience would become a legitimate form of protest in the century ahead.
Electronic civil disobedience often involves a method similar to DDoS attacks, known as "virtual sit-ins." In this type of attack, protesters coordinate to repeatedly access a chosen website simultaneously, aiming to disrupt its functioning and deny access to regular users by either slowing down its performance or causing it to crash altogether.
The ongoing discussion in political philosophy delves into the significance of civil disobedience within modern societies. The study looks into the established concepts of civil disobedience and how they relate to this occurrence and its evolution in the digital age. The study focuses on radical democratic ideologies that view civil disobedience not as an unavoidable wrongdoing but as an ethically questionable remedy for the inherent shortcomings of legal and governmental actions.
Navigating the ethics of Electronic civil disobedience can be intricate, as it frequently involves weighing the preservation of personal privacy against the revelation of misconduct. Although many ECD measures aim to uphold fairness and expose corrupt behavior, there is still the important consideration of the risk of privacy violations and unintended repercussions.
Individuals involved in electronic civil disobedience might encounter legal repercussions, along with possible backlash from the entities they are targeting. This includes the possibility of facing criminal allegations, being sued in civil court, receiving penalties, imprisonment, or experiencing social disgrace.
Let's look at an example of electronic civil disobedience: Anonymous is a group of loosely organized individuals worldwide, including hackers and activists, who often participate in what they would refer to as electronic civil disobedience protests. Since the mid-2000s, these groups of individuals have executed numerous significant cyber assaults on government websites, corporations, and institutions.
A major operation they have undertaken was Operation Tunisia, which aided the 2011 Tunisian uprising by striking government websites, and Operation Payback, aimed at entities against internet freedom, like the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA). Also in 2011, during the Occupy Wall Street movement, activists orchestrated a digital protest on the New York Stock Exchange website, urging backers to frequently access the site, which resulted in a temporary disruption in its operations due to the surge in visitors.
