Politics, control, and computer networks: the Chinese Student Lobby of 1989

To understand the political impact of computer networks, we need to resolve a paradox, identified by Van Dijk [11], which claims that computer networks both centralize and decentralize power. They centralize power by allowing a single leader to inform and control large numbers of followers. Conceivably, the centralizing tendency of computer networks produce an electronic tyranny of the sort envisioned by George Orwell in 1984. On the other hand, these networks also decentralize power by promoting easy access to information and by letting individuals challenge or circumvent established political structures. Arguable, the decentralizing power of the networks ultimates in an electronic democracy, in which all major questions are settled by plebescite. This paradox is starkly illustrated by the Chinese Student Lobby of 1989, which is perhaps the first major network political activity. This example also helps us resolve the paradox and understand the how computer networks affect political decision making. The Chinese Student Lobby began shortly after the Tiananmen Square Massacre of June 4, 1989. In the wake of the massacre, many students feared that the Chinese Government would again oppress intellectuals. Those Chinese students in the U.S. felt especially vulnerable, as most were required by law to return to China following their graduation. To protect themselves, these students created a political organization by using a variety of network forums. This organization pressed the American Government to change immigration law and was successful in getting Congress to pass a bill called “The Emergency Chinese Student Immigration Relief Act of 1989.” President Bush, who initially wanted to veto the bill, decided to implement “The Emergency Chinese Student Immigration Relief Act” as an Executive Order. In many ways, the Chinese Student Lobby is a classic American grassroots effort. The students had a political need, they built an organization to represent them and they convinced the Congress and the American people of the rightness of their claim [6]. The networks were important to this effort, as the students were scattered at universities across the country. Computer communication helped the students make decisions and coordinate their actions. But behind the grassroots facade were all the trappings of a modern political lobby. The Chinese students relied heavily on professional political help to get their bill through Congress. They received much assistance from the sponsor of the bill, Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) and from George Stephanopolis, then a Congressional aide to Rep. Richard Gephardt (D-MO). Most important, they were assisted by the Washington law firm of Arent, Fox, Kitner, Plotkin and Kahn. The law firm represented the students in Congressional negotiations and ran a national media campaign[4]. The network record of the lobby shows the tensions within the student organizations and illustrates the paradox of centralizing and decentralizing forces. At different times, it shows the students debating issues, educating themselves, making decisions and working together. This activity is part of participatory democracy and the network forums allowed even the most isolated students to participate. At other times, the network forums were little more than adjuncts to the professional media campaign. When this occurred, the networks did not engender open debate but told people how to act, what to do and where to go. They concentrated power in the hands of a few and often obscured the presence of the political professionals.