From Utopia to Dystopia: Will the Internet Save or Destroy Democracy?

Q4 Arts and Humanities Redescriptions Pub Date : 2021-07-22 DOI:10.33134/rds.352
Paul-Erik Korvela
{"title":"From Utopia to Dystopia: Will the Internet Save or Destroy Democracy?","authors":"Paul-Erik Korvela","doi":"10.33134/rds.352","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"People often expect salvation or doom from the same source, be that some sort of divine power or technological invention, for instance. Certain innovations can be viewed as promising or threatening, depending on the viewpoint. In recent times, there has been a distinctive re-evaluation of the role of new information technology and social media for democracy. What seemed to rescue and reinvigorate democracy in the turn of the millennium is now regarded as its nemesis. How did this come about? During the 1990s, in the early days of the Internet, the network was seen in political research as a sphere of freedom in which democratic civic debate would increase, grassroots views of individuals would surface, and new communities would emerge among like-minded people, regardless of location and nationality. The state’s official policy of ‘one truth’ could be challenged and the abuses of those in power, big business, and the authorities could be exposed. This is in marked contrast with the current narrative of threat to democracy currently connected to the Internet and social media. The Internet was supposed to break the state information monopoly, as well as challenge the mainstream media and provide an open democratic platform for citizens. The mainstream media could no longer hide inconvenient truths or suppress dissenting voices. The gatekeeper role of media could be diverted. Vertical power relations would have to give way to horizontal communities. The increase in citizens’ discussion platforms was seen as deepening and expanding democracy and the ideal conditions for free deliberative democracy would allegedly emerge with Internet. Today, many aspects of the Internet, such as hacking, information warfare, and the power vested in Internet platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, emerge rather as threats than salvation for democracy. The bliss of free access to information has turned into fear of false information, censorship, conspiracy theories, and hate speech. Horizontal communities of like-minded people, independent of time, place, and states, have begun to be seen as threats. It is therefore important to look critically at this change: are there grounds for past technooptimism and, on the other hand, for current technophobia? In the early days of the Internet it was likened to uncharted territory and wild frontier by its first generation of visionaries. It was first and foremost seen as a marketplace of ideas and information, in which the libertarian ideals of freedom and equality would prevail. Anonymity Korvela, Paul-Erik. 2021. “From Utopia to Dystopia: Will the Internet Save or Destroy Democracy?” Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 24(1), 1–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33134/rds.352 REDESCRIPTIONS","PeriodicalId":33650,"journal":{"name":"Redescriptions","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Redescriptions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33134/rds.352","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

People often expect salvation or doom from the same source, be that some sort of divine power or technological invention, for instance. Certain innovations can be viewed as promising or threatening, depending on the viewpoint. In recent times, there has been a distinctive re-evaluation of the role of new information technology and social media for democracy. What seemed to rescue and reinvigorate democracy in the turn of the millennium is now regarded as its nemesis. How did this come about? During the 1990s, in the early days of the Internet, the network was seen in political research as a sphere of freedom in which democratic civic debate would increase, grassroots views of individuals would surface, and new communities would emerge among like-minded people, regardless of location and nationality. The state’s official policy of ‘one truth’ could be challenged and the abuses of those in power, big business, and the authorities could be exposed. This is in marked contrast with the current narrative of threat to democracy currently connected to the Internet and social media. The Internet was supposed to break the state information monopoly, as well as challenge the mainstream media and provide an open democratic platform for citizens. The mainstream media could no longer hide inconvenient truths or suppress dissenting voices. The gatekeeper role of media could be diverted. Vertical power relations would have to give way to horizontal communities. The increase in citizens’ discussion platforms was seen as deepening and expanding democracy and the ideal conditions for free deliberative democracy would allegedly emerge with Internet. Today, many aspects of the Internet, such as hacking, information warfare, and the power vested in Internet platforms such as Facebook and Twitter, emerge rather as threats than salvation for democracy. The bliss of free access to information has turned into fear of false information, censorship, conspiracy theories, and hate speech. Horizontal communities of like-minded people, independent of time, place, and states, have begun to be seen as threats. It is therefore important to look critically at this change: are there grounds for past technooptimism and, on the other hand, for current technophobia? In the early days of the Internet it was likened to uncharted territory and wild frontier by its first generation of visionaries. It was first and foremost seen as a marketplace of ideas and information, in which the libertarian ideals of freedom and equality would prevail. Anonymity Korvela, Paul-Erik. 2021. “From Utopia to Dystopia: Will the Internet Save or Destroy Democracy?” Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory 24(1), 1–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.33134/rds.352 REDESCRIPTIONS
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
从乌托邦到反乌托邦:互联网会拯救还是毁灭民主?
人们通常期望来自同一个来源的救赎或厄运,例如某种神力或技术发明。根据不同的观点,某些创新可以被视为有希望或有威胁。近年来,人们对新信息技术和社交媒体对民主的作用进行了独特的重新评估。在千禧年之交拯救和振兴民主的东西现在被视为它的克星。这是怎么发生的?20世纪90年代,在互联网的早期,网络在政治研究中被视为一个自由的领域,在这个领域,民主的公民辩论将增加,草根阶层对个人的看法将浮出水面,志同道合的人将出现新的社区,而不分地点和国籍。该州“一个真相”的官方政策可能会受到挑战,当权者、大企业和当局的虐待行为可能会被曝光。这与目前互联网和社交媒体上关于民主受到威胁的说法形成了鲜明对比。互联网本应打破国家信息垄断,挑战主流媒体,为公民提供一个开放的民主平台。主流媒体再也无法掩盖不方便的真相或压制反对声音。媒体的看门人角色可能会被转移。纵向权力关系将不得不让位于横向社区。公民讨论平台的增加被视为民主的深化和扩大,据称自由协商民主的理想条件将随着互联网的出现而出现。如今,互联网的许多方面,如黑客攻击、信息战,以及赋予脸书和推特等互联网平台的权力,都是对民主的威胁,而不是救赎。自由获取信息的快乐已经变成了对虚假信息、审查、阴谋论和仇恨言论的恐惧。由志同道合的人组成的横向社区,独立于时间、地点和州,已经开始被视为威胁。因此,批判性地看待这一变化很重要:过去的技术乐观主义和当前的技术恐惧症有根据吗?在互联网的早期,它被第一代梦想家比作未知的领域和狂野的边疆。它首先被视为一个思想和信息的市场,自由和平等的自由意志主义理想将在其中盛行。匿名Korvela,Paul Erik。2021.“从乌托邦到反乌托邦:互联网会拯救还是毁灭民主?”重新描述:政治思想、概念史和女权主义理论24(1),1-3。DOI:https://doi.org/10.33134/rds.352重新说明
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Redescriptions
Redescriptions Arts and Humanities-History
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
5 weeks
期刊最新文献
On Lithoconcepts: A Critical Contribution to the Discussions about the Study of Concepts Insults in the European Parliament: Between Self-Rationalisation and Intercultural Turbulence Fostering Feminist Politics of Veganism: On ‘the Political’ in Donna Haraway’s Approach to Food, Eating and Animals Book Review: To the Uttermost Parts of the Earth: Legal Imagination and International Power, 1300–1870 by Martti Koskenniemi, Cambridge University Press, 2021, 1125 pages. ISBN: 978-0521-76859-7 (hardback), ISBN: 978-0521-74534-5 (paperback) An Apocalyptic Speech Outlining a Theory of Dictatorship: Carl Schmitt Inspired by Juan Donoso Cortés
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1