NationStates Jolt Archive

Hi!

I have to write a paper on how does the internet affect politics, based on the writings of John B. Thompson.

He says that the internet will replicate the cafes from 19th century, where educated people came together to discuss politics.

Well I'm 13 and I was able to launch a political movement off of my computer. I recruited a bunch of members and my site got over 5,000 hits in the first few weeks. And my essays are being distributed throughout the internet, so yes, the internet has helped my politcal life a great deal.

Well, a lot of us here are educated, but far from intelligent. ;)

Seriously though, the internet helped open my eyes to what is going on, but through being able to discuss politics with complete strangers without having to lose face, you really become less of a party drone and are forced to develop a true sense of your political beliefs.

He says that the internet will replicate the cafes from 19th century, where educated people came together to discuss politics.

Hardly, since anyone and everyone that's roaming around will say something, and I'm not sure everyone that does is educated, or even intelligent :D

-edit-

Hehe... Kleptonis had almost the same thought about it.

Before I joined NationStates in early 2003, I had little interest in politics. Now I am much more interested. The forum is also useful for hearing people's views and understanding different perspectives.

NS is my political life...
Well, most of it.

Hi!

I have to write a paper on how does the internet affect politics, based on the writings of John B. Thompson.

He says that the internet will replicate the cafes from 19th century, where educated people came together to discuss politics.
Gore's intarweb has increased communicativeness globally. On an internet forum you get the oppurtunity to hear the opinions of people from most of the world. However, some people don't listen to anything of what anyone says, so it doesn't really matter where they discuss politics, it'd be the same as just not discussing politics all around for some people.

Well, if by educated you mean misinformed, partisan and kids with too much time in their hands, then yes.

It will contribute to the exchange of ideas, for sure, but it will actually make it harder to come to useful conclusions, simply because of the sheer number of ideas and the limited number of good ones.

If you had a link or name of the article so that I could read it I could comment on it a little better, and probably not step in some of his assumptions.

The internet has definitily had an effect on the discourse of politics, particularly in the last few years. There are obvious indicators such as Howard Dean's fund raising and the appearance of bloggers as a portion of the press at the convention, but their effect on how the discourse is effected is more compelling. Look at the effect of sites like The Drudge Report, or the rise of stories like the CBS document controversy. The latter in particular is remarkable. The show had barely aired in most western states before bloggers where all over it with all sorts of claims.

While it is certainly true that news channels feed off each other for stories, that practice is not only more previlant with bloggers, but far more rapid. Just like any rumour, the more people it passes through, the more distorted it comes from. However, the news (traditional media) reacts to noise, and noise is what bloggers make. By then, the story is long from it's source, and repitition and reasonable probability is truth. In essence, internet information moves too fast for reason.

This does lend itself to the essay (I hope) in the time period. It makes me think that there are a phenominal amount of similarities between the turn of the last two centuries, including things like the conspicuos consumption that lead up to them and the quantum leap in the speed and volumne of information provided to people. Just like the turn of the last century, we are to a degree not equiped to handle it.

However, and this is where this century differs, this new flood of information has an element to it that was lacking in print and broadcast mediums that preceded them and it has its own advantages and drawbacks. That is the access. As I have already talked about, the problem is that the only test information really has to pass to be available is the authors ability to post it. Forums such as this open that up to an even greater degree. This is where the cynisism of the posts you're getting stems from. On a forum a 13 year old parroting his parents is given just as much credence, for good or bad, as someone who has researched or is involved in what ever is being discussed.

While the number of voices would tend to drown out reason, there is a leveling factor. You can see it in here, if you look. It is not enough to merely post here, eventually you have to back up what you say. And even then, it's not enough to find a source, because eventually someone will examine the source of your source. This access to information, and the ability to research the information, raises the bar and is something not available to the political cafe goers of a century ago. Certainly not everyone climbs to this challenge, and as it the current situation, loud and often is still given more legitimacy than it should, but in the realm of discourse, like on this board, the eventual value of the discussion raises, MKULTRA and Eustrusca not withstanding.

For myself, I live in a unified town, more or less. I agree with the ideology of where I live, but it does mean that I don't get to hear the opposing voices. You cannot be honest about any thought or opinion unless you've put it to the test, or at least hear the argument against it. Again, the cynics will point to the fact that very few people have changed thier minds on this forum, and I would not argue that. However, they have become better at defending thier point of view. Even MKULTRA has changed in slight degrees how he goes about things from his Red Arrow days.

So, now that no one is reading this anymore, I would say that there is a give and take in the internet, and an unmistakable stamp in the distribution of ideas. The lack of a filter has created within the community both a disproportionate respect for volumne and the creation of a community implied filter-which I would argue is a more involved on a personal level. No one is doing the filtering for you, you have to have more agency in verifying what you absorb. We are not used to that yet, and our old standards are currently creating more confusion than information. How that will develop over the years has yet to seen. It could go either way.

However, and this is where this century differs, this new flood of information has an element to it that was lacking in print and broadcast mediums that preceded them and it has its own advantages and drawbacks. That is the access. As I have already talked about, the problem is that the only test information really has to pass to be available is the authors ability to post it. Forums such as this open that up to an even greater degree. This is where the cynisism of the posts you're getting stems from. On a forum a 13 year old parroting his parents is given just as much credence, for good or bad, as someone who has researched or is involved in what ever is being discussed.



What do you mean parroting?

I'd say the 'net has had a huge contribution. Granted, there is often a shortage of intelligent comments in many threads, but at least here at NS I can talk politics at all. In the real world, the only people I can find are the one's that say, "I'm a <Republican/Democrat>, and all <Democrats/Republicans> are idiots," and then they don't even know their party's platform.

yes I read a blog that has changed my life and the most important words were "It all comes down to carrots (liberals) or sticks (conservatives). By the way: if you’re in a rush and need to run, here’s the spoiler: You can offer a carrot. Not everybody likes carrots. Some people may hate your carrot. Your carrot may offend people who worship the rutabaga. But no one likes being poked in the eye with a stick. That’s universal."

What do you mean parroting?
Repeating their beliefs, without thinking about what they mean. Like a parrot.

Repeating their beliefs, without thinking about what they mean. Like a parrot.


Heres an example:

Kerry's a flip flopper!!!!!!one!!!!!!11111

It's a mixed blessing, because when you debate with someone face to face, you can catch them off guard or in the heat of the moment and get them to say things but with internet, people can cool off if they are pissed off at someone and then make a post, check it for errors, spellings, wording, etc. It's a way to mass debate but I don't know if it truly brings out some people's "true" beliefs or not.

I prefer face to face politics. It's more fun that way! Plus you can really irk people better that way. I'm starting a petition here at my apartment building against the so-called "improvements".

bump...


i'm sorry, but the more data i collect, the better my paper will be...

Repeating their beliefs, without thinking about what they mean. Like a parrot.

My parents are both moderate democrats. I am a liberial fascsit, I much more radical then eitheir one of them.

I do not take much of the political discussion going on in here too serious.

Plus in these discussion almost no one is willing to be convinced, so it mostly are futile discussion. Might as well talk to a wall

I wouldnt have much of a political life bar the occasional debate with a friend, so forums like this are good but not excellent, as most of the time people come with set views that they wish to voice rather than wanting to listen and maybe be influenced.

Definitely. Only last week I got to check out the footage of that guy from Congress wit that Prozzy on the internet.

Definately. I became an anarchist because of what I read on the internet.

bump... again.. sorry...

You meet a lot more views on the internet that you probably wouldnt meet in life and actually be able to talk to them about their beliefrs. Anarchists, statanists, born again christians etc. etc. While there are a lot of lies around on the internet, being able to seriously discuss more extreme views we can be able to understand them and also why they may be wrong. I do wish for more face to face debate, but the internet is definatly an improvement.

Thanks to the internet, I was able to see Bush stutter, look into the camera with a dumbfounded expression on his ugly excuse of a visage, laugh myself off at his repetitive sentences and generally have a good time being entertained by the US presidential election propaganda. Thus I can now wholeheartedly say, Kerry will be the better president, although I am not even American :p

Cant say its improved my life but i am dead certain that everyone else benefits from my infinite wisdom.