Dissent in sentence

264 examples of Dissent in a sentence

There are no checks and balances for this, as the right wing media continues to stifle true dissent and replace it with faux debate forums such as this.

Rather than quelling dissent, government intervention only inspires more people to take their grievances to WhatsApp, Facebook, Twitter, and other social media platforms, where Africans are increasingly challenging corrupt governments, exposing rigged elections, and demanding to be heard.

Leaders in nine of the 18 African countries that held elections in 2016 placed some level of restriction on the Internet to limit dissent.

Then in December, officials in Democratic Republic of the Congo ordered an Internet shutdown the day before President Joseph Kabila was scheduled to leave office, thereby quashing online dissent when he refused to step down.

For decades, Mugabe has relied on intimidation and violence to stifle political dissent.

Besides, most Russians support the government with no dissent at all, they say.

He has cracked down on even the most restrained criticism or signs of dissent, and has even banned Internet jokes, including memes comparing him to Winnie the Pooh.

In Europe, the debate is characterized by dissent and division, exemplified by the United Kingdom’s recent vote to leave the European Union – an outcome that was shaped largely by overblown fears about immigration.

In response, the CCP continues to develop new technologies to stifle or redirect dissent; but the battle for control of China’s public discourse is not one that the country’s leaders can win every day for the foreseeable future, and they know it.

That is why people have continued to fill Tahrir Square whenever the military has tried to consolidate its power and suppress dissent.

This being India, the film – which is just beginning its cinematic release in the country, months after it hit Western screens – has also provoked dissent.

Dissent was stifled, facts were suppressed, scrutiny was blocked, and the free flow of information was choked off.

This transformation cannot be reversed: each FOMC member holds strong views about which direction monetary policy should take, and each is willing to dissent when needed.

And in an even more blatant effort to curtail public dissent, the administration has tried to bar assemblies from 80% of the sidewalks around the White House.

The Internet may not be the unalloyed democratizing force that many first thought it was, but it nevertheless opens up vast possibilities for “assembly” and expressing dissent online.

As a result, board members owe their loyalty to the managers who directly or indirectly appoint them – and thus have little incentive to dissent, lest they be punished with exclusion.

Well-functioning democracies are embedded in complex constitutional and other laws that separate executive, legislative, and judicial power, and that protect freedom of speech, assembly, and peaceful dissent by those who lose elections.

Furthermore, the determination to crush dissent affects the urban middle classes, which might otherwise be the strongest proponents of security-sector reform in this area.

At the same time, however, problems like corruption, inequality, environmental degradation, official corruption, and repression of political dissent and religious expression have worsened.

Consider the failure of the Kremlin’s attempt to block Telegram, Russia’s leading instant messaging service: far from quashing dissent, that effort has fueled support for the recent protests.

In this moment of transition, dissent from someone of Li’s standing could have precisely the kind of destabilizing impact that China’s leaders fear.

The Board agreed – with no notable dissent – and even shortened the selection process to a mere three weeks.

Despite these countries’ lack of a tradition of open dissent, globalization has made it plain to all that economic development requires regime change.

The importance of this should be abundantly clear to Westerners, whose modern civilization grew out of religious dissent that was initially met by the violence of the Inquisition and the Counter-Reformation.

China’s Hidden DemocratizationSHANGHAI – Since Xi Jinping was anointed as China’s new president, reports of official repression of dissent have hardly abated.

Rather than trying to ease dissatisfaction or attempt reconciliation, Arab governments are using brute force to shut down every possible space for dissent or debate.

But when we welcome diversity – and the debate and dissent that goes with it – we sow the seeds of stability and progress.

Campaigns must – and, increasingly, do – focus on genuine changes to defamation laws, to ensure that governments cannot use them to stifle dissent.

Suddenly, there exists a mechanism for participation, control, dissent (limited as it may be) and the introduction of innovative strategies that seek to legitimize change within a traditional context.

While dissent is the lifeblood of any open society, for China it is a dangerous poison.

Related words