Wednesday, May 03, 2006
Continuing To Look Into The Future Of Politics
Monday I started asking questions about the increasing decentralization and deinstitutionalization in our society. The Internet has been a large driver of that.
But, like most things that "cannot be controlled" someone feels like they need to control it. Hedgehog Blog takes a look at efforts to try and rein in the Internet. So far, their efforts are failing, here's hoping it stays that way.
I have been wondering if power always accumulates. Don't you have to accumulate it to use it? Certainly that's been the theory a great deal of human history has been based on.
But generally that accumulation ends up corrupt. Want an example? Since blogging/journalism seems to be leading the way in this regard, consider the case of the NYTimes and leaks, and their utter defiance of law. Worse yet, their presumption that they are somehow above it. What's that old cliche'? - "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"
There are a lot ways people have tried to answer this problem. In the US we have done so by placing the power not in the hands of people, but in the hands of institutions. This has worked, but not always.
I googled "accumulation of poltiical power" and interestingly got almost entirely pro-marxists sites. Example
Blogging, with it's myriad checks and balances (other bloggers), has proven to be the best answer to the institutional corruption that is the legacy media. The answer it would appear is not to futher empower some watchdog institution, but to empower everybody. To in fact decentralize power.
But is it really complete decentralization, or is it temporary centralization that automatically disperses once the situation is resolved? At the height of Rathergate, Power Line became the uber-blog. Now, while they are still big, they stand more as a part of the big crowd.
I'm still not sure what all of this says about the future of political parties and politics in this country, but I sure do find it interesting.
Related Tags: communism, the Internet, decentralization, political power
But, like most things that "cannot be controlled" someone feels like they need to control it. Hedgehog Blog takes a look at efforts to try and rein in the Internet. So far, their efforts are failing, here's hoping it stays that way.
I have been wondering if power always accumulates. Don't you have to accumulate it to use it? Certainly that's been the theory a great deal of human history has been based on.
But generally that accumulation ends up corrupt. Want an example? Since blogging/journalism seems to be leading the way in this regard, consider the case of the NYTimes and leaks, and their utter defiance of law. Worse yet, their presumption that they are somehow above it. What's that old cliche'? - "Power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely"
There are a lot ways people have tried to answer this problem. In the US we have done so by placing the power not in the hands of people, but in the hands of institutions. This has worked, but not always.
I googled "accumulation of poltiical power" and interestingly got almost entirely pro-marxists sites. Example
Marx never used the term imperialism, but it remains a key part of any analysis of contemporary global capitalism. The sinews of political power and accumulation that are derivative of capitalism?s birth as a global creature might have twisted and turned, but they continue to connect African societies to a complex, combined, and uneven global political economy which has hardly served the people of Africa favorably.The irony here is absolutely amazing. Marxism, which empowers the institution of state far more than democracy ever dreamed of, ended up historically completely corrupt - see the USSR - and yet it is supposed to be the answer to the Corruption that accompanies the accumulation of power?
Blogging, with it's myriad checks and balances (other bloggers), has proven to be the best answer to the institutional corruption that is the legacy media. The answer it would appear is not to futher empower some watchdog institution, but to empower everybody. To in fact decentralize power.
But is it really complete decentralization, or is it temporary centralization that automatically disperses once the situation is resolved? At the height of Rathergate, Power Line became the uber-blog. Now, while they are still big, they stand more as a part of the big crowd.
I'm still not sure what all of this says about the future of political parties and politics in this country, but I sure do find it interesting.
Related Tags: communism, the Internet, decentralization, political power
