The Internet is Not Democratising

Tom James @ 03-06-2008

New ideas are always interesting, and they are the bread and butter of good science fiction.

Here’s one: suppose the Internet is not the democratic, equalising, freedom-enhancing system it has been portrayed as? This network of computer networks has supposedly had the greatest democratising influence on freedom of speech and expression since the invention of the printing press.

But wars are still fought, prisoners are still tortured, dictators still grinding their people into the ground, and the oil price is rocketing. We have the Internet now: why hasn’t all that bad stuff stopped yet?

If you only read one lengthy article this month let it be this essay called The Liberizing Ideology of the Internet by a poet called Jesper Bernes.

Bernes’ basic argument is that the idea that the Internet is democratising and liberalising is wrong. A few controlphrases stand out:

The internet is a screen, a series of screens. It’s true: everyone can have their own blog, can publish their poems online so that the whole world can not read them, can peruse and produce the contents of the internet freely (in all senses of this word). But below this level of freedom, this level of leveling and equalization, the old exclusions and inequalities still obtain—differences in literacy and knowledge, differences in access to free time, differences in positionality with regard to social networks and cultural capital.

The essay is full of high-brow ideological arguments, which are interesting in their own right, but the basic idea is remarkable for the fact that it is not one that is often read or heard. It is that the Internet is just another system of control:

Essentially, with the internet, capitalism gifts the masses with a false commons where people webcan work, off the clock, creating information and relationships that the ruling class can enclose, appropriate, commodify, and sell back to us at a later date.

This isn’t a luddite argument: the Internet is a valuable and necessary tool, and there’s a lot of stuff in Bernes’ article I don’t entirely understand, and of what I do understand there’s some I don’t agree with. I’ve never felt comfortable talking about politics in terms of ideologies like socialism or capitalism, or of economics in terms of class. I prefer to discuss politics in terms of policy and pragmatism.

I’m aware of the irony of suggesting the Internet isn’t a force for freedom of speech in a blog: but it’s always worth bearing contrarian opinions in mind.

What is the reality of the Internet? Is it genuinely revolutionary, or does it “virtualise and disembody resistance” as Bernes suggests? These are perfect questions for science fiction to explore.

[via Jon Taplin's Blog][link to Little Red's Recovery Room][images by MR+G and renatotarga]


Related posts


Congress2.0

Paul Raven @ 04-02-2008

State_of_the_Union_Address_Congress Now this is a bit more like it. Opencongress.org has been running for a while, but now it’s got social networking baked in. Track your favourite (or least favourite) senators, bills and issues! Make friends! Blog about it! [Via MetaFilter] [Image from Wikipedia]

Now, I know it’s early days yet, but this is surely a step in the right direction towards a genuinely inclusive democratic process? All we have in the UK is an e-petitions facility that gets used frivolously. :(


Related posts


The infancy of e-democracy

Paul Raven @ 29-11-2007

Houses of Parliament by night I have to confess to a certain bullish optimism about the potential of internet technologies to transform the way democratic governments operate - but I’m not under any illusions that we’re even close to success yet. There are steps being taken in the right direction, however - Michael Cross takes a look at the UK government’s electronic petition site, and concludes that - while it’s largely used in frivolous ways at the moment - the fact that it’s there at all, allowing admittedly odd (and occasionally crack-pot) opinions to appear on government webspace can only be a good sign. [Image by spjwebster]

Sadly, politics being politics, new technology isn’t always going to be used in the nicest of ways - I was rather disappointed to hear [via MetaFilter] that the US Democrats are crowdsourcing their smear campaigns by supplying video footage of Republican candidates for people to remix as they see fit. Fighting fire with fire … as the old anarchist joke goes, “it doesn’t matter who you vote for, the government always gets in”.


Related posts

Tags:

Democracy2.0 for the UK?

Paul Raven @ 14-06-2007

Interesting news from my side of the pond, in that the UK government has published a report that recommends it begins to engage fully with grassroots web-based activism and user-created communities online. As that article notes, it’ll take a radical change in attitude for it to succeed, but it’s a relief to know that they’re not completely stuck in the 20th Century any more. I’d like to think that my essay on Government 2.0 had something to do with it, but I’m not quite that deluded.


Related posts