Feedback: Politics and the Internet Dog

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote about "The Last Days of Politics," particularly the surreal, archaic vibes coming off the presidential campaign. I said I'd be posting some responses. Here are a very few excerpts, reprinted with permission, and thanks for them. (Make sure to check out "The Internet Dog" proposal for a virtual George Washington) If you want to keep the e-mail coming, I'll keep the discussion going.

From: Zach

Date: Tuesday, September, 26 2:45 p.m.

"Jon,

"First of all, politics will never "end" as long as there are people with different opinions and agendas, and finite resources. Politics is simply the art of how we all live together in a civil (or uncivil) society. The Internet may affect how it is played out, but it won't change the fact that it happens...

"As for the much-ballyhoed "apathy" of the American public, in some ways it's a rational response. People "know" that we have the best government money can buy, and that our reality field is shaped by corporate media giving us corporate candidates...So politics is not dead. What is dying is widespread, popular participation in politics. What this should be seen as is is not the Triumph of the Internet, but as the disenfranchisement of the average person."

From: Mike

Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 3:50 P.M.

"You ask:" Can anybody cite a single interesting or important idea or argument that's emerged from the months of campaigning in the current U.S. presidential race?"

The answer: "Partial privatization of SS, even as feeble as the proposals from either major party candidate are, is both important considering what is at stake (the likely crash and burn of the SS system, or horrific payroll tax hikes) and interesting in that this has always been a taboo topic."

From Robert

Date: Tuesday, September 27, 2000 2:51 PM

"Without meaning to give offense, I think you're far off the mark with your 'Last Days of Politics' essay...politics is not about parties, it's about power. If you have political power, you can have things your way; if you don't, you're stuck at the mercy of those who do. This is why politics is so appealing to so many people; on one level it's basic self-preservation, and an another level, it's a narcotic. "

From: tig

Date: September 26, 2000 4:02 PM

Jon,

I have an idea for a symbolic Presidential campaign. The "campaign" would take place entirely on an Internet Web site. There would be no public appearances by the candidate. This campaign should probably be called an anti-campaign because the point of the Web site would be to highlight a significant problem with the current paradigm used to elect our leader.

The current process causes candidates to focus on making promises in exchange for votes. This vigorous campaign activity has been institutionalized by the party system. It has resulted in candidates giving too much attention to subjects that have nothing to do with what is written in the Constitution. None of the candidates show any interest in carrying on *The Great Experiment* as it was originally envisioned by the founders of this government.

The central premise of the anti-campaign would be to re-elect a virtual George Washington as the next president. The person to be elected would promise to do his or her best to make decisions as they believe George Washington would if he were alive today. The purpose of the symbolic campaign is to remind people of the origins of our political system. George Washington set the standards for behavior for a president. In recent years the presidents have been poor reflections of this noble statesman. He was a singular figure in the history of our country in many ways. I find it notable that he did not seek the office of president, he ran without opposition, he never campaigned for the office, and was not a member of a party. The actual person who would be elected to serve as George Washington would run anonymously under the pseudonym "The Internet Dog". This name is inspired by the 1993 New Yorker cartoon. This cartoon captures the essence of Internet equality. The goal of running completely anonymously is give focus to the ideas of the office, not the person. Critics may claim that electing someone without physically seeing them will not allow the character of the candidate to be viewed, but this is nonsense. The obsession with the physical appearance of the candidate is a 20th century invention. A desire to not let ego or personal traits enter into the vote is a very strong character statement.

From: Mark

Date: Thu, Sep 28, 2000, 12:01 PM

"Jon, ...I do have a comment on the changing political expectations of the generations. I am a computer scientist (26 years old, "gen X" I suppose).

Personally, the level of my political discernment is a direct consequence of my interaction with technology --- namely that as a programmer and mathematician, I approach politics with as much scrutiny and analytics as I do computation. I've come to expect more clarity in the law and I have a strong sense of what American citizenry should mean. I wonder if this critical thought is partially responsible for the change in political expectations. (The remaining cause can probably be attributed to the identity politics of libertarians, but that is an entirely different subject.)

From: "K"

Date: Sat, Sep 30, 2000, 8:37 AM

Katz,

It's late and I'm having difficulty forming even the simplest of sentence structures -- I've been awake over 26 hours now so I'm a little out of it. Before I begin, let me first say that I have a great deal of respect for you... Yet as I much as respect you, I cannot be so bold as to support the statement that politics are losing their place in society altogether. The current state of politics will no doubt remain unchanged so long as the public tolerates it.,..

To say that politics are insignificant is to deny the power of the government. If you wish to reaffirm the power of our government, "forget" to pay your taxes. I assure you the government will take notice and spring into action. The government is, and will always be, in control. We cannot allow ourselves to disregard the ignorance of recent legislation regarding the Internet. We cannot allow ourselves to forget that "they" are in control, not us. The fact that there is such a distinction between "they" and "us" is a problem in itself. The bottom line is, this is not our Internet. As of now, legislation lags behind and the 'net remains, for the most part, lawless; like any frontier. But in order for it to become settled and for communities to flourish, government will step in and laws will be made. Privacy/anonymity will be lost and accountability will be ensured. .. In order to protect technology from restrictive legislation, we have to pay attention to politics.

I believe it is true that politics will have to be reborn to fit into the new culture.

From: Chris

Date: Tuesday, September 28, 2000 2:48 PM

"Jon,

Regarding your "Last Days of Politics" comments: I like this line of thought...I think the future of freedom and the survival of humans is grounded in the notion that "There is no one right way to live." No matter how many programs, band-aids, social policies, financial interventions and celebrity rock-star benefit concerts you throw at the world's problems, they will always just be small sticks trying to slow the flow of a large river.

"The politics of the future will be about "what works." They will no longer be centered around individuals with health care plans and tax cuts, but will highlight the ways of life that are thoroughly, provably successful and sustainable. That applies to everything from education to environmentalism, from economic models of society to social norms of human relationships."

From: Mark

Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 2:06 PM

"Sir,

"I spent several hours a day online and watch politics carefully. I do not see the Net worming its way into politics (and thus destroying it as you seem to posit) but rather the other way around -- politics is beginning to worm its way into the Net. The Net, from the earliest stages that I was involved in, has been a very Libertarian place. Largely populated by techies, idealists and college kids, the majority who took the time to go online were not deeply connected to politics in any way. Instead, we tended to be the ones who felt that so long as government was not noticing us, we were the best off.

"Now, however, the Net is the country. And politics is becoming one with the Net...While on the Net we see all thought possible, with the two parties we see only thought acceptable to the majority. The fact is that the Net does not change common sense or the cultural thought of the American populace."

From: Kara

Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 1:47 p.m.

"50/50 disagree. Politics as we know it, I think, are definitely out the window. Nobody with half an eye open has much interest in voting...I guess I'd rather things just became more direct. Some honesty in our leadership. (Hello, I'm RJR Nabisco, and I'll be dictating your fiscal policy for the term.)"

From: JoeC

Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 11:32 PM

"Look at energy. The harnessing of energy has created modern life, it is the backbone of society. It has grown amazingly powerful institutions, technologies, etc. The political process protests these old technologies and power structures, more accurately they own them. Even though we have the means to completely revolutionize how we use energy using the Net, and other new technoligies, here we are once again in the midst of another fossil fuel crisis -- insane."

From: Marcelo (from Italy)

Date: September 27, 2000 10:43 PM

"The reason politics is not very interesting, is because we are pretty much happy with the current status quo; but, given the complexity of our civilization, it is naive to think that you can live well under bad government. If there was a candidate proposing the banning of all computers (I'm just being ludicrous to make a point) politics would suddenly end. That would be the hacker's top priority."

From: Gordon

Date: Tuesday, September 26, 2000 11:34 PM

"The way you describe it, a revolution is coming, where by doing nothing, something is done. While this may work if we can get people educated, the general populace can still be easily sucked in by personable politicians and leaders. When enough people hold the essential meme of anarchy -- that explicit authority is not necessary for free society to function), we will wake up and find ourselves in a truly free world."

From: Tom

Tuesday, September 26, 2000 6:07 PM

"...Though I disagree that politics is finished, I think you have hit on a legitimate phenomenon. I believe it was Boaz who first observed that more and more people are entering the "grey market," where things not quite illegal but not quite sanctioned exist. he used the examples of homeschool, gated communities and Internet medical advice (IIRC) to show that more and more private citizens, and not just the rich were "seceding" from official society. No public education, no public police, no state-licensed sawbones. As the major parties blend together, descending into the pit of the demagogue, the public is "on its own," finding solutions to the problems they perceive."

From Jake

Date: September, 28, 2000 5:40

"You could be right on this one. I suppose it had to happen. But you still suck, and I intend to block you again after sending this."

Comments

Another generation

[Dark Paladin]

The Net is certainly transforming the political structure. When I hear my wife, - a woman I love dearly but her belief that good technology ended with Tetris is a thorn in my side - state after the debates that she wants to "look up the candidates web page to see what the details of their plans are", I see how things are changing.

The problem is, its going to take a generation. Napster is a hot topic on the net - while the "average citizen" knows or cares little about it. So is the issue with my.mp3.com, online privacy, copyright, and so on - things the average (read: not heavily online) citizen) usually doesn't regard as important.

Over 2/3's of the voters are over the age of 40 (simply by the fact that if the average life-span is 100, then we have more people over 40 than anything else). I think this is an important thing to take in. If you look back at every major political movement - civil rights, women's vote, opinions regarding gays and lesbians, new technology - it takes about 20 years for the next generation to fully understand it. By the time that we're in our 40's and 50's (which I imagine is still 20 years out for the majority of slashdot readers) there will be a majority of people interested in issues like online copyright and privacy, or the detail that we can gather on our political candidates.

For those fighting, keep it up - it will take time to build. For those voting, keep informed and inform your friends as well - if you don't tell them, they won't know. And for candidates looking for my vote - be afraid. I'm watching you closely, and those coming after me will watch even closer.
John "Dark Paladin" Hummel

Re:Ralph Nader -- Not a wasted vote

[Svartalf]

How many times do people have to say this before it soaks into everyone's thick skulls?

"Wasting" votes is what the damn Republicans and Democrats want you to think. If you vote what you really believe, rather than voting for the lesser of two evils (the two front-runners in the current incumbent pollitical parties...) then you are wasting a vote. Why? Because if enough people do as you should, vote their feelings, then perhaps enough people will vote for that candidate (or another) and cost a clear victory for the other two candidates at the least. If there's enough states that come in tight instead of being a shoo-in, then maybe the politicians will sit up and take notice that they're screwing up in the eyes of the electorate. And who knows, the candidate you vote for might just actually take that state after all. That would really send a message to the politicians.

It's not a wasted vote to vote Nader, Browne or any of the others. Vote what you believe in!