Concerns Formed from Opportunities Technology has improved many issues in society, but along with these improvements there have also been concerns for if it were to fall into the wrong hands. In Naomi Klein’s “Fences of Enclosure, Windows of Possibility”, and Ian Bremmer’s “Democracy in Cyberspace: What Technology Can and Cannot Do for Us”, both authors discuss new opportunities as well as barriers in modern development. If Klein were to comment on Bremmer’s essay, she would agree with the fact that Bremmer discusses how people can overcome fences that are set before them. Both authors interpret the way technology has the ability to assist or bring down the efforts of activists. With the power of media, governments and autocrats are capable of limiting what people can see in the outside world. Along with the advancement in digital development, there are also negative aspects that come with it. Klein would support Bremmer’s view on the openness of technology, and the various worries that follow. Klein’s position on useful and harmful fences would force her to view these worries as a way of how people react to boundaries that are set before them. Technology has the power to support and destroy social movements and activists who work for democracy. With the power of modern science, it may be hard to realize when to pull back when it comes to activism. Klein’s perspective of this concept is shown when she writes, “... it’s not clear what will emerge from these liberated spaces or if what emerges will be hardy enough to withstand the mounting attacks from the police and military, as the line between terrorist and activist is deliberately blurred” (200). Klein discusses how there is no definite outcome of what is to happen to privatized liberal spaces. She explains how there is a fine line between activist and terrorist, which all depends on the level of how far people are willing to go. With the power of technology, the activists have a larger network and more resources in order to fight for their cause. With this wide window of opportunity, this openness is misused and creates worries for governments and authority figures. Furthermore, with the improvement in technology not only do activists gain more control, but so does the average samaritan. Bremmer writes that “the spread of the ‘freedom virus’ makes it harder and costlier for autocrats to isolate their people from the rest of the world and gives ordinary citizens tools to build alternative sources of power” (41). Brenner mentions the “freedom virus” that these commoners are affected with, and how it has made leadership positions in democracy become uneasy. In this case, technology has the ability to support social movements because the Internet is giving the ordinary person a chance to grow and achieve power. Both Klein and Bremmer interpret how technology is going to affect activists and their cause towards, or against, democracy. Klein’s idea of not knowing what will happen with the activists, yet comprehending the capability of technology will help them widen their influence. This is supported by Bremmer’s claim that the freedom virus has created a window of opportunity for society. The average person holds the potential to tear apart walls through the web, and can attain status and influence to change a community. Just as easily as having the ability to fight for a cause through the tips of one’s fingers, it can also be taken away just as quickly. Along with the government worrying about people having too much access with the aid of outside resources, there is also the worry of the people having that access taken away from them. Censorship is a concern for civilians when it comes to governments, or any type of influencing figure that is restricting the use of resources that are available. It seems that mass media, along with the aid of ruling democracies and