Slashdot Mirror
The Net as the New Jerusalem
Wertheim says we live in a time marked by inequity, cynicism and fragmentation. She isn't the first or only social observer to point out that our civics are no longer sustained by a firm belief in our society, that we are no longer sure of its purpose. The primary message emanating from the current presidential campaign is that most Americans have lowered their modest expectations about politics, and now believe their government is dominated by a coalition of interests -- corporations, big media, political parties, lobbyists -- rather than by them.
Like true believers watching the sunset of the Holy Mother Church, we have a growing sense of political ennui and disintegration accompanied by a surreal air of prosperity. Some seek to fill this void with a yearning for traditional spirituality; others (like Wertheim) are coming to see cyberspace as a transformative new spiritual geography.
For all its stumbles and shortcomings, the new cyber-culture at its political heart has always had a clear sense of purpose: freedom of speech and thought; the interactive and open distribution and liberation of information; the exploration and development of creative new technologies, the shared creation of a culture with its own particular values.
In response to the decline of old notions of politics and society, Weirtheim writes in her provocative new book, "The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace," Americans in particular look to religion and spirituality for grounding in their lives. She sees a palpable spiritual yearning -- reflected in the right-wing zeal of the Christian Coalition, in California-style mysticism, and in the pseudo-Native-Americanism of an executive retreat at a sweat lodge -- vibrating throughout U.S. society.
Wertheim sees cyberspace as part of a continuum dating to medieval times, through the discovery of astronomical space in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, to the relativist conception of space in the twentieth century, and on to contemporary physicists' eerily beautiful ideas about hyperspace.
Wertheim believes this has brought us full circle. Once again, we have a physical space for the body to inhabit, and an ethereal space a number of people believe will ultimately become the home of the soul. She even goes so far as to suggest cyberspace will become the technological version of the Christian heaven.
It's a big idea, one many people will be attracted to. I think I see what Wertheim means, but can't quite enter this kingdom myself, or buy the notion of cyberspace as heaven. The world is probably ripe for this new techno-spiritualism, but it probably doesn't cover all generations. Perhaps it applies mostly to the disillusioned and fatigued Boomers, who talked about revolution and spirituality, but didn't quite achieve either. Now they rush to fill their moral void, to overcome their political disappointment by trying to infuse politics with some higher purpose, perhaps the highest of them all.
Boomers have a bad name at the moment, but they did -- some quite consciously -- lay a framework for a different kind of revolution, one they were able to pull off. They did the legwork and visionary planning, and built the preliminary distributed architecture, that became the Net. In a way, the Net is one of the Boomers' greatest legacies, though it would take the next generation to patch together the Web and push cyberspace to the next level. That turned out to be quite a leap.
But if you take Wertheim's idea and apply it to politics, the whole notion takes a new, highly relevant twist. Cyberspace may not be the gateway to heaven, but there is definitely a new kind of geography here, and we could well be witnessing the Birth of a Nation. Or at least, of a 51st state, a new sort of space with intensely political as well as spiritual significance.
Scholars like Wertheim see global and domestic politics going through a sea change. The kind of politics being played out by Bush-Gore-Nader and their anemic parties is clearly exhausted, overwhelmed by change and challenge. The process doesn't seem to have any purpose, and does suggest a culture whose political structure is in decline. Because the system has no moral purpose, it has no moral authority; a growing number of people ignore it. Online, an entire generation has grown up learning how not to take government seriously.
Cyberspace, writes Wertheim, is a completely new kind of space, a New Jerusalem, potentially welcoming male and female, First World and Third, "...is open to anyone who can afford a personal computer and a monthly Internet access fee ... many cyber-enthusiasts would have us believe that that the Net dissolves the very barriers of race and gender, elevating everybody equally to a disembodied digital stream."
This New Jerusalem stuff is appealing but, again, relates as powerfully to politics as spirituality.
Younger Americans, especially those who spent a large part of their lives as citizens of this new space, have mostly detached themselves from the institutions producing the last days of politics. They don't often read newspapers or follow the evening news or check out the newsmagazines. They don't see themselves as Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives. There's a lot of earnest chatter about the importance of voting, but it's defensive. Mostly, people talk about voting to prevent something from happening: a certain person's being elected, the judiciary's being tilted too far in one direction or another. It's hard to find a citizen who's voting for something.
My own sense is that they are witnessing and participating in the birth of a different sort of nation, seeking not so much spiritual as moral and ethical renewal. We have the sense of being present at the revolution, even if it's not clear what kind of revolution. People are hungry not only for spirituality, but for a sense of purpose, and they don't see one advanced in the election.
The birth of any legitimate political system begins with a moral purpose, an ethical underpinning for existing. Some see cyberspace as a new kind of sacred space, and maybe they're right. Politically, it's an empty place waiting to be filled up. The people running the other system seem out of ideas and ethical impulses. Perhaps the void could be filled from within. Then cyberspace would, in fact, become the New Jerusalem Wertheim describes.
Next: Politics and ethical technology in the New Jerusalem
Now the Israels are going to settle the internet, and the Palestinians are going to DDOS them.
So are the Palestinians going to car bomb this new Jerusalem?
-russ
Don't piss off The Angry Economist
But it's currently chuck full of commercial nonsense and porn pop-up ads, so I don't think we'll be seeing any of that happening soon.
I think Margaret Wertheim has been reading a bit too many Gibson novels. :-)
Start here, or try a google serach, or a deja search.
I have been invloved in studies done at Yale University which show that people who spend more than 20 hours a week online comit less crimes and are more likely to be honest decent human beings. We spent three years collecting data and the results totally contradict all the stuff the media says about the net breeding hate and violence. The thing that surprised me the most is that the IQ's of people who spend time on the net is no higher than those that don't. We are not smarter, just different.
Yale is going to rock the world when we release the full study results next year.
All the best,
--Bob
Is it me, or is anyone willing to try and get in on the internet craze to get a little publicity?
That is a deeply well thought article full of more BS than I can comprehend.
God knows the last thing I want to think of is the internet as my final spiritual ground, you try having a LD relationship, or spending 20 hours straight on the net, you come to see that it is NOT whatever this author is depicting.
Anyways I just dont see this ladies point, I think the net is not mysterious enough for me...
Jeremy
Yes I read as much of the article as i could tolerate
New revolution, year right.
.com address, and if you go there all you see is marketing material.
Sure, the guys who got there first may have been great thinkers with their idealistic morals. And as the thing grew a new 'society' of sharing and cooperation sprung up. And then e- happened. Ignore the drugs warnings about 'E', the thing that's a bigger problem is 'e-'. Every advert on television has a www (stands for wank wank wank amongst the group of hackers I hang around with)
It's turning into another way for big corporation to shove adverts down our throats.
That's an entirely different thing from the new society some previously (naively) hoped for.
FatPhil
I wonder if in 20 years time there'll be web pages dedicated to "classic old web pages", like oldies' radio???
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
The Net gives us another community to exist in, but far too commonly at the expense of that which we already have. Whilst it can help build relationships with other people, even people we're never likely to even meet in real life, if we fail to build relationships with people in our own physical community then this is hardly improving our lives or society as a whole.
Despite the idea of a global village sounding appealing to many, in many ways the Net is causing us to become more insular.
"Cyberspace:" used 11 times.
"Politics:" used 8 times.
"Digital:: used only 1 time (thank God).
"Society": used 4 times.
"Techno-": used 3 times.
"Net" or "Internet": used 5 times.
Not as egregiously redundant as most KatzBait, but it's still pretty turgid and dull. It doesn't tell us a single thing we don't already know or that we couldn't wow our luncheon partner with over our V-8 and chicken salad.
Will Jon Katz ever write something that doesn't sound like it was dashed off first thing Saturday morning after watching "Johnny Quest" cartoons?
Honorary Member of Jackie Chan's Kung Fu Process Servers
Jon, how about a reference? If her work isn't online, how about article/book titles? It's hard to evaluate her ideas if we don't see them!
Best Slashdot Co
What is the trend in America regarding religion? Is it on the increase or on the decrease? It seems that many in Britain have quasi-religious beliefs, but define such things for themselves insofar as they do at all, is this happening in America?
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
There is no
with corporations as colonists, shooting at us with heavy guns(lawsuits) for looking at them suspiciously.
//rdj
No one can understand the truth until he drinks of coffee's frothy goodness.
--Sheikh Abd-Al-Kadir, 1587
Nothing she is afraid of is new. People have always been detatched from politics. Think how much peasents in England in the 1200's cared about politics. Also all of this rhetoric about inequality is BS. There is more equality now than ever before. There is more social mobility in our society than in any society to ever exist. Even by Ralph Nader's statistics, 1 in 20 families in the U.S. has a net wealth of more than $2.5 million. And civics has always been in the realm of the philosophers in society. The majority of people never have a clue about what's going on.
I think Margaret Wertheim has been reading a bit too many Gibson novels. :-)
This might be considered off topic by some, but if you look carefully, it is actually right on topic.
Ever noticed how the Gibson books seem to progress toward a living matrix? Like at the end of Neuromancer Case is talking to the AI and it says it has BECOME the net. And he even sees a little ghost of himself walking around in the matrix with Neuromancer and Linda Lee. Ok.. now in Virtual Light, there's the character (Security Guard with all the allergies whose name escapes me) who grew up in a trailer park that believes that God is in the TV. (Neuromancer?) In Idoru we have the "walled city" which is a virtual community created out of a shared killfile (with the help of Neuromancer?) There are other examples in his other books, but it's too early for me to recall them.
Is god in the net? Well, philosophically speaking, yes. The Christian, Muslim & Hindu gods are generally looked at as being omnipotent (all powerful) and omnipresent (everywhere at once) and of course omniscient (all knowing). How could this be? Hindu philosophy suggests that GOD (a symbol) exists in each of us. If so, anywhere we project our consciousness (including when we place our awareness "online") there GOD (still a symbol) is.
In that sense, "heaven" is merely the place where our spirit comes to contentment and bliss. Heaven is really just a state of mind, not a place you go when you die. Most humans live in a state of mind called "hell" because they choose to focus on the negatives.
If you project your anger and fear and self-loathing onto the web, then it will be just as dark and dirty and unwholesome as you believe it will be.
If you project your good will and positive thoughts onto the web you just might find it heavenly.
(and that goes for any other kind of internal or external interaction)
If you want to be happy, think happy thoughts, and the world around you will get more and more beautiful.
If you want to be angry, think selfish, angry thoughts, and the world around you will get uglier and uglier.
-The Reverend (I am not a Nazi nor a Troll)
-The Reverend (I am not a Nazi nor a Troll)
=(.\')=
(heheh)
The Net is a tool. Nothing more. Looking to the Net for some sort of morality is ridiculous. It like looking to a hammer for some sort of guidance. The net is a powerful communications tool, but it is the people who make the net worthwhile.
As for creating a heaven on earth or the net creating a new revolution, I highly doubt it. To base a revolution on the net is pretty silly for two reasons:
1) People aren't very truthful on the net. That was the first leason I learned back in the days 2400 bps - people says stuff on the internet they don't believe and that they won't act on in real life.
2) You can shut the power off. No electricity, no internet. While I don't think the power is likey to go off and bring the net down, it is possible. Revolutions need a solid base, and that last time I checked, electrons didn't make a good base to build on.
provolt
Politics does not equal Spirituality. I vote for people (or ideas), not worship them. Can anyone expain how Katz jumped topics? Maybe there is a paragraph or two missing from the article?
A pizza of radius z and thickness a has a volume of pi z z a
Oiiii stop that, somebody mod Jon as flamebait quick.
~ppppppppö
The New Jerusalem has been a vision of Utopia among the idealistic and unrealistic for centuries.
People who "herald" anything as the New Jerusalem clearly don't read history, or philosophy.
Utopia, is Justice, is Reality, is Transcendence is a paradox. (The bold & caps are there for a reason.)
Its all verbal and mental masturbation and people who jerk off with such pifflage are idea murderers and the leading cause of their own unhappiness. And they're also more than willing to share that last attribute with you
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Please tell us so we can read these things for ourselves, and remember the Reading Rainbow refrain (paraphrased): "We shouldn't have to take your word for it."
What else can you expect when several influential religions claim one Holy Place?
Kiboism, the Temple of the Internet Oracle, the Church of the SubGenius, just to name a few....
And don't forget all those folks who consider the Net an Unholy Place!
---
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
Not if they surrender quickly. However, we will spare nobody the loveing crush of the lead pipe that asks for it.
http://www.armory.com/~crisper/Scorch/
it hasn't been around for very long, there's a bunch of squabbling over who owns what, with no end in sight, like the net. instead of jews and palestinians, its consumers/users and lawyers/corporations.
wow, i'm agreeing with Katz, that's messed up like a soup sandwich...
---
---
Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
There's nothing more pathetic than boring academics who try and catagorize the Net into something it isn't. There's nothing spiritual about the net. Perhaps, there's something spiritual about some of the wacko's who use the net, but that has nothing to do with the Net itself.
Someone you trust is one of us.
SEE...
JonKatz wave his hands in mad synchronization!
HEAR...
the gasp of the crowd as he strokes the egos of twentysomething computer nerds!
GAZE IN DISBELIEF...
as he draws parallels between computer users and GOD HIMSELF!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
-konstant
Yes! We are all individuals! I'm not!
I have to agree completely that the Net is the New Jerusalem according to this iDefense article:
Middle East Tensions Spill Online.
If you'll notice my tagline, it's Japanese for "no matter where, all people are connected". It's a saying from Serial Experiments: Lain, an Anime that deals with the questions (and answers) you just posed in that post. (I won't spoil it for people who have yet to see the series, so I am not going to go into detail.)
The Net has the potential flexability to be whatever want it to be. It's a medium of pure expression and individual preference (it's just being used as a cashcow at the moment).
What will the Net become when we can interact with it on a more personal basis? Direct neural links? Nanotechnology being used in a human brain to transfer signals? What is it going to be like when we can consciously enter this ethereal thing we call "Cyberspace"?
I have no room for boat rockers like you. Either submit or be bludgeoned.
http://www.armory.com/~crisper/Scorch/
Reminds me of bigger longer uncut. Kenny is bad and gets "access denied" when he tries to get into heaven. later after redeaming himself he gets in and its a porno site. Parker and Stone figured it all out 2 years before this lady.
calvin: I work best under pressure.
As much as I love my internet access, the thought that it will bring the classes together, without the boundries of race, sex, religion, or class, is a bit naieve.
What the web is doing is creating a new class of global citizen. Admiteddly it is one that that crosses many of the traditional boundaries, but it is still not an inclusive one. As the article states: "[Cyberspace] is open to anyone who can afford a personal computer and a monthly Internet access fee". Perhaps that puts the middle class on equal footing with the upper, but it still leaves out a global majority, and a large minority even within the US.
Furthur, while those who have access to the net have a voice, it doesn't mean anyone is listening. Discusion forums such as this one are still dominated by the educated and by those with a gift for public expression.
Before we tout ourselves as a new Utopia of political and social equality, or allow others to hold us up as such, let's all remember that we are not representative of the masses.
Admit it, JonKatz basically invented the modern Slashdot trolling technique (or at least the competent technique). His one-sidedness has spawned a horde of morons who flame his stories; only the controversial stories about Microsoft, Cue:Cat, and the political interview series rival JonKatz's rantings as far as the number of posted comments goes. Personally, if Slashdot had a JonKatz filter, I would definitely use it.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
My jaw dropped. The other friend agreed with this tortorious analysis. I tried to get a word in edge ways but the answer was always "No they're not".
Naturally, if you want to help a group of people you want to do two things. You want to make their agenda a part of politics, so it gets addressed. And the only way of doing that is to encourage democratic participation. You also want to act on that agenda. But cynicism being what it is, that doesn't appear to be possible to be interpretted that way. Growing up with a "special interests rule politics" attitude, probably not helped by the extent to which that's very much the case, people form a model of politics that the whole basis is unprincipled individuals looking for 'markets' to address, and providing the best product for that market, so they'll vote for them, rather than looking at it from a base of principles where generally people are encouraged to vote to make their needs and concerns known and part of the agenda.
Much of the movement to the Internet as a forum and independent republic seems likely to pass on that corruption of politics, partially because of the US-centric approach of mainstream Internet opinion, where democratic accountability is perceived to be bad because it's "socialist" when compared against "free" market competition in all areas of the net. I find this ironic, partially because the US has a very social-democrat political structure, where even police chiefs (Sheriffs), Judges, and tax collectors have to answer directly to the ballot box, but also disturbing, because the catering to markets philosophy, traditionally amoral and often stupifying, is likely to prevail over more idealistic approaches where people are encouraged to participate for the common good and to do the right thing.
How do you go forward taking advantage of the known qualities of a free market approach without allowing it to concentrate power that undermines a more principled democratic base?
--
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
It's not on the net. It's here in good old England. So there you USAnians...
I will not cease from Mental Fight,
Nor shall my Sword sleep in my hand:
Till we have built Jerusalem,
In Englands green & pleasant Land.
William Blake
There are so many Jerusalems: -Christs -Moslems -being racist -And all the other sects -know all movies -SEX -Collecting coffee mugs (or reading Dilbert for that matter :)
-politics
-SPORTS!
-Cell phone
-CHOCOLATE! or Weed
-Other drugs (Crack gives me pace!)
-Gambling
-Games
-Know all the "freeware" sites
-BitchX
-Napster
-pr0n
-read /.
-and discuss on /. :]
basically there's a constant change, I wanted to point out, at the moment it's changing to "My IP is my castle"
./ers do NOT entertain Coward posts under the majority of circumstances...
Not even Noel Coward posts made via a net connected Ouja board ?
All the people I know are extremely spiritual, but none of them are Christian. We don't go to church but we do go to other things, like the recent candlelight vigil for victims of religious intolerance, hosted by the local pagan newspaper. I think the Right Wingers are a small percentage of the christian population, but they have a very disproportionately LOUD voice, and that's what gives foreigners the impression that we here in the USA are 'religious'.
/."
"I'm not a bitch, I just play one on
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
Your word in bold, the most important word to any libretarian, well-defines the problem with that political philosophy. To think you used this statement to counteract this by Katz:
It's hard to find a citizen who's voting for something.
It's kind of funny to see someone prove such trite and worthless fluff writing correct with such a narrow-minded statement. I dont know which statement is stupider.
Besides, isn't not voting a powerful political statement, sending a message to the politicians right where it hurts? Or something?
This threads hilarious. Full of useless babble, two dufuses inadvertently prove each other correct. Film at 11.
nobody
No, the Internet requires more than just a computer and a monthly access fee. It requires technological knowledge and most women today don't posess enough of it. (And as a side note, I hate that recent AAUW study which claimed that women/girls don't wan't to be techs because it's boring/nerdy/antisocial, etc. What crap.)
The net *is* discriminatory because the majority of Internet movers, shakers and doers are male. How many women techs/hacks do you know today? Not many I'd assume.
60 Minutes (the news show) did a great piece on females on the Net a few months ago. Lesley Stahl interviewed the founders of Ivillage and a popular gift registry site, and made a point to note that there WAS NOT ONE FEMALE working in the back with the heavy technology-the servers, routers, etc.
I have to note that I witness this phenomena everyday. In the "welcome to the world of computers" classes I teach, the ratio is around 3 males out of a class of 18 or so. The first time I walk into a class to teach I *always* see a few jaws drop and am asked incredulously "Are YOU the teacher?", because, guess what, I'm in my mid-twenties, female, and love working with technology.
Am I male bashing? Definitely not. Am I saying that females who are on the net are idiots? NO. I'm just trying to make the point that the Wertheim's claims of the net being gender neutral is a great fantasy, but far from the truth.
This is another view of the world.
The merit to this article, though, is Katz' discussion of Americans' profound sense of dislocation. We Americans are a very lost group of people. We are divided, fragmented, powerless, very deeply scared of everything, and yearning to find a meaning to it all.
Some posters here have wondered "Why does America need a 'national mission'? The Brits don't have one, the Canadians don't have one." The reason is that if we do not have a national mission for ourselves, we just might see our country for what it really is--a vast money-making conspiracy that has absolutely no regard for human life or human rights or human dignity. And that's a pretty shocking thing to realize. No wonder we're burying our heads in the sand.
Technology can NEVER be a religion, or a salvation, or the answer to our problems. It can be a useful tool to help revive the American people and save ourselves from doom, but only in the context of a broader socio-political movement that aims to truly fix the American system.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
-John Lennon
Slashdot HAS a JonKatz filter, if you feel that strongly.
/. homepage again, problem solved
...Personally I wish people would stop insulting Katz and just not read his stories if they don't like his content or writing style but thats just my flame of the day.
Go to your user page and their should be a section "Exclude stories from the HomePage", one of the subsections should be "Authors".
Simply select JonKatz and his stories will never appear on your
Good lord there are some fucked up people out there. I never knew Jon Katz had such a vocal group of critics who immediately pan everything he says. Just because he introduces new views to you morons, you pillory him? Why do you even read his articles if you don't think he has anything to say? I'm no hick and am pretty damn well-educated and I'd say that Katz is one of the most important writers out there, in that he is writing about topics nobody else will touch, topics which are very interesting and central to our future--and he does it well, without exaggeration, and very insightfully. I'd take a Katz article any day over any other writer in America.
You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one
-John Lennon
sorry, this isn't funny, as it has already happened. starting with the last wave of violence about a month ago, palestinian and isreali hackers are trying to ddos web sites by sending a large amount of people to websites, on top of actual attacks
Despite how much we have changed the world around us and despite all the scientific discoveries, all ages of philosophy an culture: humans have not significantly changed as beings for thousands of years. I've seen the other day on "Discovery" that a 100.000 years old pair of skeletons was discovered - a female and a child - and those skeletons are no different from our own. It's hard to say when civilizations started, but some buildings built 2000 years ago are still in use (for example Pont du Gard) and others built up to 8000 years ago still exist. Writings about social problems that were created at that times and made it to ours are still valid, still interesting. Just a short example - a quotation I received today:
"We trained hard--but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams, we were reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing, and what a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while actually producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization."
Petronius Arbiter, 210 B.C.
Isn't this still valid today?
Someone may ask why did I write all this and what is the connection between ancient civilizations and the topic of the article. I think that before we will speculate about huge changes in the way our society would be organized we should have a proper prospective. We have to realize that for thousands of years our ancestors lived first as cavemen and then in various forms of society - and that those years have formed us, not those few mere years that passed since computers were invented, Internet was created or even liberal, media-backed democracy became dominant form of social organization. I don't think those few years can outweigh those thousands of years of human history. It is really stupid to expect for example, that suddenly society would not be composed of many people being led by few who have power and vision to do so. It is really funny to expect that the role of wealth and money would change - since it didn't for at least 60 centuries.
I think that it's the toys we play with that change - not the way we play.
I think that report was totally discredited by the Govt, most elements of the media and the general public. It was produced by some chippy ethnic minority types and some Guardian reading self-hating white liberals. British is a pretty inclusive term as it means the inhabitants of the island of Britain. English, Scottish and Welsh are more ethnically based terms.
I thought it did-- you can block stories by Jon Katz.
Given the current events in the middle east, this is a very timely piece. Not only is the net becoming a new spiritual entity, but it is also becoming a battle ground for spiritual (and cultural) wars. Cyber attacks are becoming a common extension of physical battles such as the current Middle East conflict in the "old" Jerusalem. News.com reports that cyber attacks against pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian sites have been on the rise since the start of the conflict 6 weeks ago. And with Net access being delivered to the camps in the West Bank and Gaza, the attacks (and their motivation) will continue on for at least the length of the current conflict. I think that is the real meaning of the New Jerusalem in are society. It's a spiritual common ground, and therefore, like the Old Jerusalem before it, it will be where the battles of differences are fought.
I'm down with that, as it were
The only message not voting sends to the politicians is that they do not have to pay attention to you.
Look at it this way...
If only one person were to vote this comming Tuesday, that single person would determine who will be president for the next four years. During that time the politicians will not be trying to get more people to vote, instead they will concentrate on getting that one person to vote for them. All that matters to most (all?) politicians is getting into or staying in office. Therefore, the only thing that will hurt a politician is getting voted out of office, and that won't happen if people do not vote. So, not voting does not hurt politicians, it merely gives them license to ignore you.
Hooptie
"Heavens, it appears that my weewee has been stricken with rigor mortis!" -- Stewie Griffin
that there are exactly two Dutch words that have been integrated into English without problems? Apartheid is one of them. somehow this makes me want to move to another country...
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
Look, it's a lot simpler than Wertheim's convoluted forecasting. As Eliade wrote in his work 'The Sacred and the Profane', humans feel a need to connect to a higher power, a source of strength. Often their attachment is to a place because something historical happened there, or to a time of the year because something historical happened then.
Because we perceive things as happening 'on the net' -- and that perception will only grow stronger as virtual reality becomes more common -- it's fairly safe to predict that people will derive a sort of spirituality from cyberspace. Already there's a sort of sanctity attached to internet 'places' like Slashdot; people regard it as special, and they get very incensed when it does things they regard as 'out of canon'.
So yes, in time as groups and places evolve on the internet, I can see the sources of strength people find there becoming sacred, even spiritual to them.
But unlike Wertheim, I discount any involvement of Christianity in this evolution. Christianity is based around the sacredness of the teachings of one man. Whatever spirituality arises from the internet, Christians are most likely to see it as a threat and an aberration.
Internet Spirituality will arise, but it will be wholly non-traditional and likely highly individualistic. And as the internet is unique in human history, the spirituality that people find in it is also likely to be unforseeable and new.
Genocide Man -- Life is funny. Death is funnier. Mass murder can be hilarious.
Please show me in the Koran where Jerusalem is mentioned even once.
--- Speaking only for myself,
At first, it seems that the Internet is generally seen as some kind of cultural integrator between the First and Third World, between the sexes, between people of different colour and so on. At least where the First and Third World are concerned, this is plain wrong, as pointed out, for example, at the famous e-commerce criticism page BlowTheDotOutYourAss.com, where you see a rather well-made campaign under the slogan "ButWeDon'tEvenHaveElectricityInAfrica.com" - I think the point is quite clear. In fact, Jon has even pointed this out himself unwillingly, when he says:
Even in the more developed Third World countries, it is very uncommon that anyone from a not-so-wealthy social environment can afford a personal computer; and as far as the Internet access fee is concerned, well, in Sudan the Internet costs a thousand dollars per year, at a flat rate. (If you're interested, the provider is SudanNet. The website is not very impressive, but you can contact them that way, and the access providing works, which I know from experience.) Did you know that in Egypt, which is definitely one of the more developed countries of the Third World, so that one might argue that it doesn't even belong to the third world at all, university professors get a monthly salary of eight hundred Egyptian pounds per month, equalling two hundred dollars? That settles it, I'm afraid. The Internet is a tool or a toy, whichever you prefer, for the rich. In the West, practically all of us are rich, which you undoubtedly will notice if you ever set foot on African soil, for example [possibly excluding South Africa].
A second thing is that this is just another example of a quasi-mystical attitude towards the Internet, as if it was some spiritual entity that eventually will lead to the solution of all problems on Earth. I personally don't believe in the Internet possessing any metaphysical qualities - it is just a very powerful facility of communication. When telegraphs or telephones were invented, the leap in ease of communication was probably just as great as the leap introduced with the Internet, yet no one would probably attribute metaphysical qualities to a plain telephone, not even then. It was just a practical, useful innovation.
To me, it appears that one of the unique qualities of Internet communication is that unlike in meatspace, you can choose your partners and means of communication with unrivalled ease and flexibility. The result is that people with a more technical interest (i.e. "geeks") who often lack social skills of communication hang around at discussion areas like this or communicate with people like themselves, while persons who are of a maybe more sociable type, possibly with less technical interest, interact with others of their sphere. As a result, the Internet only serves to give anyone what they want and to enhance the character traits that people already possess: geeks interact with geeks, which is communication, of course, but which doesn't help them at all in interacting with non-technical people and/or in the real world, while non-geeks interact with non-geeks, thus enhancing their communication abilities because the topics of their communication are most often derived from some social sphere in meatspace. The same applies to political opinions, with ethnic groups (if you find me a nationalist Israeli discussing things in a civilized way with a nationalist Palestinian, you are good) and so on. The Internet, as a result, does not help people interact with others of a different frame of mind.
Part of the argumentation here is derived from the notion that the Internet is not the cyberspace invented by Lem in the sixties and made popular by Gibson in the late seventies and early eighties, and that it is not some sort of place apart from the "normal world". Lem's and Gibson's idea of cyberspace encompasses the notion of it being ever-present, which the internet is not (go looking for Internet adverts in Kaduna, Nigeria), and it providing sensual immersion beyond looking at a however-large screen and being played the occasional streaming noise. At its present stage, the Internet is just an addition to meatspace, and as long as we still live, dream, eat and raise children in the "real world" as opposed to the "cyberspace" that the Internet is (erroneously, I think, but that's just my humble opinion) commonly referred to as by the media, it will not serve to raise people's problems from the frame defined for them by their environment provided in the real world. To assume that the Internet would solve any real world problem beyond some people not making enough money and some other people not having anything to play around with is in my opinion mainly a na?ve, progress-optimistic, overly-Modernist self-delusion about the nature of problem solutions.
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
Not to mention being the spiritual home to the peculiar Messiahnic Jews.
Fortunately those wingnuts will never amout to anything.
To drive out and kill all the Cannanites already residing there?
if you're going to make an analogy, atleast make one that works. There can be no "New Jerusalem" without an end of the old and the birth of the new.
Revelation, Chapter 12.
"1": And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
"2": And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband.
"3": And I heard a great voice out of heaven saying, Behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell with them, and they shall be his people, and God himself shall be with them, and be their God.
So there must be a new Convenent with God... and the Net is not it. It has the possibility to be a new populist means of ending the old "authoritarian" ways, but that has yet to become substantial.
All five of the women that post on Slashdot can put up pictures of themselves, and Taco can run a poll.
Maybe, if you think an article is worth moderating, you should actually look at the links first.
Score:4,GoodTroll
Whenever anything technological captures some significant public attention there will be some learned nincompoop coming forth to blow it all out of proportions. Probably when the safety pin was introduced, (before my time), sombody was declaring it the dawning of a new age.
"Obtuse Anger is that which is greater than Right Anger" - Lewis Carroll
The problem is this: spiritual reformation by technology is a logical fallacy. The essential idea is once we start using some new technology it will bring about a sweeping change in human nature. And as we all know it hasn't happened. Telephones improved the way we communicate, but telephones haven't improved us. We use telephones to "reach out and touch someone", and we also use telephones for death threats. This, of course, is a mild example and anyone with a little thought came come up with numerous other examples. Just because new technology can be used for a better society doesn't mean it will be. It all depends on the way we use it.
Jon's article hit a raw nerve of mine. When I was in college taking my computer classes, I used to believe in a bright and beautiful future where fancy new technology would transform us all into a utopia of gentle geniuses. I used to read the pop futurism books by Alvin Toffler and John Niasbitt, and went around quoting them.
After graduating and getting a series of programming jobs my enthusiasm has turned into disillusionment and cynicism as the true nature of the computer industry became obvious. Software isn't written clean and elegant; it's almost invariably a mess patched together for years. Computers aren't being used to free up time for leisurely pursuits; they're being used to make us work longer hours. The computer industry isn't a new paradigm of doing business; it's just the same old cutthroat dog eat dog competition.
So when I hear "The Internet is the New Jerusalem", I just feel irritated. For the most part, I like John's articles, but I had a hard time with this one. Funny thing is I just might buy the book so I can add it to my collection of naive utopianism.
And this accomplishes what?
Your vote will get thrown into the trash with the spoiled ballots and writeins for Mickey Mouse.
Your money is going to continue to go where Gush or Bore sends it. If you try to keep it all to yourself, guys with guns will come and take it away from you. The Second Amendment types will do exactly nothing.
Now, if anybody were really serious about political reform, they'd start a real "third party" and run for Congress. Remember, the "balance of power" in the House is only six seats. If those six seats went to Greens or Libertarians (or a Green -- Libertarian coalition. Brrrr.) THEY WOULD CONTROL CONGRESS.
But since nobody is trying to do this, I assume that nobody wants to. The third-party presidential candidates are simply running around ego tripping and accomplishing exactly nothing. Nader and Browne are buying into the current power structure every bit as much as Bush's hidden handlers.
--
Welcome to the Turing Tarpit, where everything is possible but nothing interesting is easy.
The evil empire of Rambus was destroyed by fire today.
Intel, despite being warned, cannot help but attempt to view the destruction and is turned into a pillar of salt. It's stock price surges.
not religous. As I grew up I have lived the revelotion of the net. And one thing I don't understand is why people consistently attribute something that they don't understand or know to something devine. What kind of logic is that? For example they don't understand death so they conjure up this idea that there is a heaven or hell. I mean who made this up. What basis do they have to make an assumption like this...You tell me.
Time is Change.
nobody
... in this era of high technology and global cooperation (note the recent launch of another Soyuz rocket to the international space station) why don't we use some of our new tech on things other than money making crap that is e-business? So I propose the Star Trek solution-- to seek out new life and new civilizations, to boldly go where no man has gone before. We have let our space program become so withered. If I see another dime spent on "global e-business solutions" (basically any IBM ad) I'm gonna puke.
Mike
Intel transfer the difficult from Hadware to software, for get more power, programmer need more technology. -- chinaitn
---snip---
Furthur, while those who have access to the net have a voice, it doesn't mean anyone is listening. Discusion forums such as this one are still dominated by the educated and by those with a gift for public expression.
Good Point, but assume just for a moment that the old ideas of social class IRL were dissolved. Here we are seeing the beginnings of new criteria forming. Education and public expression are certainly good skills, but we are inventing other modifiers as well.
Consider HTML. On who knows HTML can express themselves with hyperlinks, formatted text, and generally outwrite someone with only textual writing skills.
We also have concepts of property and status. Do you wish you had a full suit of rubicite armor? A nice house in your favorite shard? Level 80? 120,000 platinum coins?...or more realistically, a fully secured BSD box? A T3 piped into your home? A highly regarded webpage? Operator status on several EFNet or Undernet channels?
Even here, we have moderators (although randomly selected). This was posted with a +1 Bonus.
To remove social class, it may be necessary to form a society of ACs, that is to say, distinguishing characteristics necesarily form social class.
Can anyone please tell me what this article is about? It seemed like yet another incoherent babble about vague things that seem to contradict earlier articles by JK on the same subject.
Online voting will lead to the elimination of the Electoral College. Most people don't vote for presidents because they will not get to see their vote in the final tally. It may be eliminated entirely if the state they live in goes to another canidate. If you vote 3rd party your vote is never in any tally.
Why vote when your vote disappears as soon as you place it?
But if you eliminate the electoral college then suddenly every vote does count and when you see the final tally of such a popular vote with true representation you will see your vote counted. We have never had true representation up on the hill. Remember the Boston Tea Party? "No Taxation without representation!" But we have never had true representation because it was not technically feasible. But today we have the technology!
The internet will certainly lead to the elimination of the electoral college. Write to your representatives today and start asking for it!
JonKatz IS an idiot.
'Pious' maybe? 'Spiritual,' certainly. New Age and Native American practices are very mediagenic, as are cults and right-wing-politically-oriented fundamentalist Christian adherents. It's the hitchhiker syndrome at work: We're all too afraid to hitchhike or to pick up hitchhikers because the only hitchhiking you ever hear about is associated with some kind of incident. It'd be easy to say 'blame the media,' but they're just doing their jobs -- why devote column-inches to reporting on mainstream Christianity? It's not terribly exciting even if it's deeply meaningful to its practicioners. Now, as for what this woman has written, and Jon's comments about it: Color me deep skeptical, as I am of anything anybody tries to say about What the Internet Means To Us. Our wired community is still the minority, and its impact, though growing, doesn't yet touch the majority of people on this planet, for most of whom safety, food, shelter and clean water are major challenges.
"How many light bulbs does it take to change a person?" --BMcC-->
Basically, if information breeds knowledge and knowledge breeds power and brings one closer to knowing everything there is to know about the world, then the internet is the new Jerusalem.
Lord of lords, king of kings, he has come to take his children home, to take them to the new Jersusalem
--
Never hit your grandmother with a shovel, for it leaves a bad impression on her mind...
"She sees a palpable spiritual yearning -- reflected in the right-wing zeal of the Christian Coalition...."
Spiritual renewal starts with the person in the mirror. That's where it ends. It doesn't rely on politics or institutions to promote it or influence it. I'm all for people becoming more spiritual, but for the Christian Right, it's all about getting the government to impose their high standards of morality, which they rarely live up to themselves, on everyone else.
Real Spirituality is an individual living a spiritual life. That individual becomes a spiritual beacon to be emulated by those around them. I'm tired of all the remarried, ex-philanderers lecturing me on family values. If your morality is so clearly convincing, others should be influenced to follow your example. If your morality requires a bunch of politicians and police to enforce it, it must not be a very compelling philosophy. The only standards of morality we can expect to have an impact are the ones that most individuals agree to by choice. The coercion of the state will never lead to a moral society.
But it's no more spiritual than the telephone, the fax machine, or the cell phone. Spirituality never comes from the things humans create. It comes from human beings themselves.
Want to be spiritual? Go hike in Yosemite, or go to church, or read the Koran. Going to a website and typing IMHO all over the place is just entertainment, amusement, and sometimes edification. It's certainly not spirituality.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
I see already "sacred" communities of like minded people forming on the internet. These communities speak to the needs of their members as well as reach out to others. One of the great advantages of the internet is that these communities can exist with members from all over the world.
Christianity as well as other faiths are already forming these communities. These communities exist on the internet and on mailing lists and newsgroups. The internet is providing a way to connect with other like minded people across great distances.
You know this article starts out cool enough, with the link to the romans and such, but then...what?!
You know, I've heard so many theories on how the internet is going rebirth our society, that I'm about ready to puke. Damnit, I'm convinced that the net is going to transform into a damn robotic lizard and start wreaking havok all over the world.
This idea is less than insightful, it is pure speculation with no basis in fact. And John Katz - ooh, we're dissillusioned, that means the net has removed us from society. Bullshit.
Because we've never been dissillusioned before. We've never questioned how we interact with our environment before. And damnit, I was dissillusioned years before I even knew what the internet was.
Rebirth? Negative, just another generation in a society where each generation is a reaction to the previous.
It's a Tower of Babel a lot more than it is a New Jerusalem. But this time the Tower of Babel will succeed thanks to a decentralized God. After all, the story of the Tower of Babel is straight out of Hierarchy 101. Look out, above!
My name is Carlos Montoya. You share files of my music. Prepare to die.
Check out this article over at CNN.com.
Internet revolution: New medium, same old wars.
---
Good judgment comes from experience.
Experience comes from bad judgment.
How in can Wertheim (or maybe these are merely Katz's words) think that the internet can truly unite the First and Third world?! The internet is only open to the "haves" --- those people "who can afford personal computer and a monthly Internet access fee."
Face facts. There are millions of people on earth who don't have the monetary resources to get sufficient food. Or get clean drinking water. Or have access to elementary-level education. Or basic medical care.
The internet will accomplish precisely nothing for these people until we as members of the Western world can make the serious commitment to work for justice.
Though the internet may be more like a new Beruit than a new Jerusalem (flame wars, anyone?), its true potential cannot be realized until we realize justice in our international society.
If you want peace, work for justice.
Don't mistake me, I'd be really grateful for an answer.
As a state gets corrupt, its laws multiply; the most corrupt states have the most numerous laws. (Tacitus, Annales 3:27)
Wow! Maybe it'll even be kinda like there is another country in the world besides the US!
--www.mp3.com/kruhft--
It's interesting how one is 'elevated' to a disembodied digital stream. Personally I like it when people respect my corporeality, and the fact that I can feel pain, and I can go hungry. I also like seeing peoples smiles, and giving hugs.
The idea of the Internet dissolving all barriers is a silly one. I've seen some of the most biggoted, opinionated garbage be posted on the net. But rather than "black or white" or "tall or short", it's "smart vs. stupid", "Linux vs. MS", "new vs. old", "technophile vs. Luddite".
Being able to love and help people doesn't come from a technology, but ONLY from a transformation within.
Cult of Personality
For the internet to fulfill any empowerment fantasies we may have about it, we first have to make progress in our everyday lives.
Unless we make fundamental changes, commercialism and corporatism will eventually take over the net because they have already taken over every other aspect of our lives.
The net will (like it or not) mirror the values (or lack thereof) of its users in proportion to the prevalence of those views. Until the balance of the net populace takes responsibility for and power over their lives and actions, the corporations will continue to dominate.
We need fundamental changes to our social, political, and economic structures that will allow a more democratic and responsible ethic flourish before we can expect a responsible and democratic ethic to flourish.
Respect for diversity, meaningful voice for individuals in politics, and widespread commitment to ethical behavior in business and economics, are all steps towards change.
The question for each of us is how do we make these things happen in our lives? Let's educate ourselves about the issues, get involved in our government, and be personal examples of what we want for the world.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Not with what's happening in jerusalem now... And in the last 50 years, hell even when the romans were here it was burned down twice. If the net's a place for terrorists to work, rivals to fight over and spill blood, and fanatical religious beliefs to take place, thanks, I'll pass. May it be something totally new, totally peaceful and totally self contained (if that's the term for something that does not need politics choosing it's method of protection, censoring and control), and that allows everyone to express himself a-la the US constitution. That's my resolution for the new year (and the REAL new millennium, not the 2000 hoax). Also, that people will stop using 300$ software from Microsoft, it's a complete waste of money and trees (Yes, they need to MAKE that dollar bill)
-Nimster
-Nimster
Your Ad Here.
dear AC,
do yourself a favour and go look up the definition of the word "insipid"... it doesn't mean what you think it does.
- Toby
If you hadn't come out and blatantly said it, I would never have known your gender... nobody forced you to divulge that information.
As for females in the tech industry, where I work they hire underqualified females over qualified males simply because of their gender. I find this all very amusing. Anyhow didn't we finish with womens lib back in the 80's or something? I thought we were onto gay rights or saving seals or something or other.
- Toby
well, i have first hand experience in that; the f/o and finger to taxation and government went great; the moving even better; the transformation of our business into a pure netplay is also coming along well, but then, oops - immigration.
.
let's face it, if someone leaves his/her country, then in the new place he/she is a foreigner and has to abide by rules that were 'for others' back home.
worse than that, if your government wants you to come back and explain just exactly where all you tax-deducted assets went, all they have to do, is wait till your passport expires. no worries you think and cue in line at the next consulate - oops the computer says that we should not issue you a passport, cause big-bro back home wants to have a chat with you... and then? well, it's tough for any lawyer to defend you years after you packed up and left, cause the court somehow doesn't want to believe that you hate the weather back home and don't like the people - they simply claim that you left in order to evade whatever it is they claim - and then - well, then, even in western systems, any court issues pratically blanko warrants and the vultures have a field day.
so, as long as there is something like a validity date in passports and immigration regulations in your new host country, then there is always a way to enforce the government's will --- well almost, there is ways around that as well, but most people aren't that lucky/smart/well-connected/bold/stupid/whatever..
there is lots of p0rn in heaven.
No Sig
Oh, my, so much fluff, so little time ...
Cyber-"space" isn't. The point should be obvious, and it worries me that it isn't, and needs to be explained. All of us, every last one of us, live in what gets referred to disparagingly in cyberpunk novels as "meatspace," the real solid physical world. OK, so some of us spend more and more time staring at computer screens. That no more means that we "live" in "cyberspace" than the fact that I spent a lot of time one year reading Lord of the Rings meant that I lived in Middle-Earth.
Tools don't provide meaning. Again, I would hope this should be obvious. It is right to look for a moral and spiritual foundation for society (Jon is on the right track here), but the things we build and use can never provide that foundation. The technical theological term for this is idolatry, and it is the thing warned against most strongly in the Judeo-Christian religious tradition. This is not new with the Internet; it goes back at least as far as Babel.
Try some non-techophile authors. In particular, Jacques Ellul's The Meaning of the City (Amazon, my review) is relevant to a discussion of technology and any supposed "New Jerusalem."
The real New Jerusalem doesn't have a monthly access charge. In Revelation, New Jerusalem is the symbol of eternal shalom, of God's justice and mercy for all who will enter and be citizens. There is no poll tax -- in fact, the global poor are probably in a better position than the global rich (which includes anyone with a computer and Internet access). It strikes me as ... almost obscene, to take the symbol of universal relief from oppression and suffering, and claim that the plaything of the rich techno-elite will take its place.
it's been a while since i read Pearly Gates, but i seem to remember Wertheim being highly _critical_ of the cyberspace-as-religion viewpoint that Katz describes. she talks about the inbreeding between religion and science in Western history, and goes on to suggest that Kevin Kelly and the other Wired utopian fanatics are just the latest spin on a centuries-old tradition. so, yeah, she discusses Katz's cyber-utopia, but in more of an anthropological "aren't these people funny for thinking this way" manner then as someone actually trying to promote that view.
did anyone else actually read this book? or are we all just trusting Katz's summary?
Didn't ya know, that's what all the rappers call New Jersey now... New Jerusalem. (They share the abbreviation NJ too) Katz lives there, he should know...
Katz is the original gangsta!
Of course I don't know how the Net is like New Jersey... I've never heard it referred to as the "Information SuperTurnpike".
And they still do. Arabs who didn't run when Israel was founded (either because they thought they'd be killed or because they thought they were regrouping for the final assault to push the Jews into the sea) still live there. Roughly 20% of the Israeli population isn't Jewish. Their freedom of religion is respected and they are able to vote and hold seats in the parliment (in fact, there were 3 Arab members of the first Israeli parliment). The recent problems with Israeli Arabs rioting in support of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza is a new phenonmenon.
Oh, and by the by, the holy books of both Christians and Moslems say that the land of Palestine is Jewish land.
Meanwhile you can trace the deed to your property back hundreds of years, documented by authorities established there hundreds of years previously and recognized by the entire world (including the United Nations), the exception being an occupying power making claims to your land in direct violation of international charter and law.
You mean like Yassar Arafat, who was born in Cairo? Or Eduard Said, whose family had left Palestine before the formation of the state of Israel? Strong claims they have there.
And where is the compensation for the Jewish refugees who were kicked out of Arab lands? Just because Israel took care of Jews who were kicked out and didn't leave them to rot in camps like the Arabs did to the Palestinians doesn't mean that the Jews shouldn't be compensated, too.
So, based on this vague notion of history and spurious claim, they kick you out of your flat and, when you join a protest against this action and begin throwing rocks at those you feel are oppressing you, fire bullets into the crowd killing you or some of your fellow protestors, then pat themselves on the back for their "restraint." This, in a context where any civilized country answers rioting and rock throwing with tear gas, water canons, and night-sticks, not machine guns, tanks, and rocket fire.
I take it you aren't aware of the Intifada which ran from the mid-80's to the early 90's. That was mainly rock-throwing children and teens against rubber bullets, tear gas, and water cannons. There were still deaths, but at a far lower rate than what we're seeing now. The new uprising has people with guns using rock-throwing children as cover. They should be ashamed of themselves. Instead, they bus in more children.
What's going on in Gilo/Beit Jala is more of the same. People who don't even live in Beit Jala are coming there at night, and shooting at Jews in Gilo, hoping to get the Israelis to damage the property and kill the residents of Beit Jala, so the international media will condemn Israel, and the residents of Beit Jala will join the fighting. The Israelis, ham-handed as they are at PR and the like, don't know how to get this story well-publicized and instead act like big bullies by shooting rockets at Beit Jala.
Are the Israelis doing the wrong thing? Yeah, probably. As I said, they don't understand PR. Israel sees itself as an island surrounded by hostiles in a world which has shown time and again that it would like nothing more than to get rid of the Jews. Condemnation by the UN isn't a big deal compared to the fallout from being called Christ-killers for 2,000 years. The Israelis are going to do what will protect themselves the most, and damn the consequences. This is a highly paranoid and stupid strategy which is going to backfire, sooner or later.
But anyone who thinks that all of this fussin' and fightin' is going to be ended if the Israelis just packed up and left the West Bank and Gaza is delusional. The Palestinians aren't going to be satisfied until there isn't a Jew left in the land. If you don't belive me, listen to some of the lovely sermons being given in the mosques, or some of Arafat's speeches when the Western media isn't watching. If Israel doesn't figure out how to get more of the world's opinion on its side, when the time comes that the Palestinians/Arabs do seriously threaten to push the Jews into the sea, the rest of the world is going to sit back and say that they deserve it.
I wish I had a solution to the problem that everyone could agree to, but I don't. But at least get your facts straight before arguing your point.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
There are no utopias. What makes most of the messes in the world is one group imposing their utopia on another group. Instead, we need to provide enough constaints (laws, regulations, etc.) so that we and our descendants have the opportunity to lead full and productive lives.
"The Pearly Gates of Cyberspace". Shyeah.
How the hell does this explain the ENORMOUS porn traffic on the internet? I can't envision St. Peter standing at Heaven's Gates handing out fliers for "Teen Hardcore XXX Action."
Moreover, what on Earth does proclaiming the Internet a New Jerusalum mean? The "Old" Jerusalum has been an intense microcosm of some of humanity's worst traits - unthinking violence, persecution, hatred. Sure enough, members of some religions call it their Holy Land, and revere it to the point of being possessed of a willingness die for it. Objectively (or, perhaps in the eyes of some, sacreligiously) this is more than a little stupid sounding. Its a city. Sheesh. Get over it. Anyway, this is the Internet? Great. Let the massacres begin?
Katz, get over yourself. In my experience Academics (or, in this case, people who consider themselves Academics) are prone to eulogizing things which they find intensely "cool." Libraries are spiritual? Well, most college professors in the humanities could wax poetic over the Library at Alexandria for weeks. The way they talk about it, its as if it was at the center (and responsible for the creation) of the whole f*cking Universe! Katz is giving the Internet the library of Alexandria treatment. Useful as it is, fascinating as it is, the internet is a computer network. Its an information hub and nothing more. Its not a community, its not life, its not God.
--Eagerly Awaiting Katz's Next Story - "The Internet Created You"
Voting time is upon both the U.S. and Canada.
As a Canadian I see a the net from distinctly different point of view.
The political system here is different in that anyone (more or less) can for their own party, which is why we don't have just Republicans and Democrats. IMO I believe that this is what creates the apparent apathy in American voters. IIRC ~50% of the American public votes in elections, because there is really only a choice between Republican and Democrat. Here in Canada we have so many different parties in different provinces (Heck, we even had a RHINO party once that was a complete FARCE, and it was a farce ON PURPOSE!)
I am not saying our system is better, just different. I think it helps eliminate the apathy though, having more choice. This is why I don't forsee the internet becoming a "dominant" political forum in Canada for some time. I can see it in the U.S. where people feel that they have a lesser choice.
Its sad really, given that there are other candidates than Bush and Gore, but they won't get in because of voter apathy, or this feeling that they could never get in. Well, they will never be elected if you don't vote for them dammit. 50% of the vote is SIGNIFIGANT!
So, to tie it all together, yes. The internet will become quite a dominant political device sometime *AFTER* the current election in the U.S. I hope it distributes more choice amongst Americans.
Well, thats my opinion. I expect to get flamed to hell and back for it.
Try to hack my 31337 firewall!
If Israel could exist in 1948 borders it would exist in them. It were Arabs who attacked just created Jewish state. They had never wanted to divide this miniscule excuse of a country, they wanted to slaughter all Jews.
So, Arabs got what they deserved. As for you, sitting in the safe USA and theoreticizing how everyone must love everyone on the Earth is just plain stupid. You can't even curb the American Anti-Semites, so what do you expect of the Middle East?
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
A member of my family went to the middle east several months ago. They stayed at a Palestinian family's flat one night. Now, my family is white and Christian, in case that effects their bias. The Palestinian man they stayed with told them about how they are treated horribly by the Israelis, backing up his claims, with several examples. When I had these "examples" told to me, it sounded like Braveheart in the middle east, with the Israelis as the English and the Palestinians as the Scotts.
Before hearing from people who live there, I had the typical redkneck American view:
Jews: poor hurt people that we need to feel sorry for
Palestinians: terrorist extremists who should be nuked into nothingness
Now I see that the Jews are repeating their historical tendencies to be an extremely selfish people. Nation after nation, throughout time have sooner or later, realised this. Its time to realise it again.
The Jews have suppressed and taken advantage of the working class time and time again. Currently, they have strong influence in the film industry (MPAA), and in the music industry (RIAA). What will it take to reform them?
Like the late Romans, says author Margaret Wertheim, our civics are no longer sustained by a firm belief in our society; we are no longer sure of its purpose.
We? Does this Margaret Wertheim claim to speak for all of us? Or all the Romans? News flash: "we" never were "sustained by a firm belief in our society". Neither, I'd hazard a guess, were the vast majority of the late Romans. Most are too caught up in the strugle for the almighty shekel to be concerned about such lofty ideals as society's purpose and whether they/we are sure of it.
Cyberspace, she writes, will fill the void.
The Romans didn't have cyberspace. For them, gladiatorial battles filled the void. And kept the masses amused and distracted. This is not a good thing. I like to think that the internet - or cyberspace, if you must - is a good thing.
The Net, she says, is the New Jerusalem, our new common and profoundly spiritual space.
This must be some kind of figurative Jerusalem. The people living in the REAL Jerusalem seem dead set against it being a common space. The profoundly spiritual nature of it convinces them that they dare not share it with anyone whose spiritual view of it might be different.
I hope the net doesn't become like the real Jerusalem, fragmented into warring factions intent on driving out or exterminating all who disagree .
I find that the very thing that makes the net a good place to spend my time (I hesitate to call it profoundly spiritual) is the disagreements. It would become a very dull place if everyone agreed.
And who is guarding it? St. Bill ? ;-)
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
Don't lump all christians into the fundamentalist, fire-and-brimstone category. There are those christians such as myself that take a mystical approach to christianity which places emphasis on God-as-a-friend and not on God-as-a-master. Also don't kid yourself into thinking that most will find spirituality in the net. I for one find it ludicrous that many people will find anything spritual about it because it is just a large network. People deep down inside need a higher power of some kind, some need a fire-and-brimstone god, some need a loving and friendly god that doesn't judge, some need many gods.
Real programmers use:
vi /dev/sda
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Journalist have to fill up their thousand words trying to get the readers attention. So they manufacture novelty and sensationalism like this religion article. Overblown.
I remember my parents getting excited about television and my grandparents about automobiles. When it is matter-of-fact to us, it doesn't dazzle us- We just use it.
Why do three major religions, nominally followed by half the world's population have this as one of their primary commandments? Not because they have to beat you with a stick to keep you in their religion. No it is because when you over-glorify limited things such as hi-tech, you'll ultimately be let down. Its just a tool- make good use of it- but don't be blinded by it.
Sadly, I think people looking for the New Jerusalemn in cyberspace are simply going to find more crystals and past-life experiences. The decline of a religious center in peoples' lives had been evident since the beginning of the Enlightenment, if not earlier. Cyberspace isn't going to change that. Cyberspace, instead, is just one more marketplace. Capitalism grows and grows and grows. Can you say Amen?
1) By the time Israel was founded the amount of Jews and Arabs was about the same in the British Mandate of Palestine. This is why they decided to divide the area.
2) Arabs in Israel live much better (financially) than Arabs in any Arab country without oil. They have all the rights citizens have. I'll point your attention to the fact that Israeli Arabs have NEVER sided with Palestinians before month ago.
Also, look at the Palestinians in Lebanon or Jordan. All of them live in the camps there. And these are Arab states!
3) Media is EXTREMELY anti-Israel. Just look how they were chastiting democratically elected Prime Minister Netaniahu. And every news service spits at Israel every time some clashes happen.
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
This is what you've come to.
Most of the Mafia in the US was Italian; does it mean that each Italian is selfish murderer who preys on honest people ???
You can never make a sound conclusion without listening to both sides. Read this:
http://members.aol.com/Ocwingate/menu.html
You'll see just a minor part of what Arabs were doing to Jews in Palestine.
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
The Jews have suppressed and taken advantage of the working class time and time again. Currently, they have strong influence in the film industry (MPAA), and in the music industry (RIAA). What will it take to reform them?
Ah. A Jew-hater. Very good. Easy to pick apart.
Since you seem to think that there is no individual Jew, but rather a single, nefarious Jew, I'll talk about it that way.
Isn't it funny how those pesky Jews took advantage of the working class, and yet they wrote the Communist Manifesto (Marx) and founded the CIO (Samuel Gompers). And they hate the poor so much, the evil Jews wrote the poem on the Statue of Liberty (Emma Lazarus). And then there's the evil Einstein Jew, who founded Pugwash.
Those black-hating Jews helped found the NAACP, and its first three presidents were evil, evil Jews.
Selfish Jew Haym Solomon helped fund the American Revolutionary War. Jew organizations like Mazon raise money to feed the hungry (and as I'm sure you'll tell me, all Jews are rich, so obviously there aren't any hungry ones, yet they are raising money for hungry people, and they only raise money for Jews...is your head going to explode?). If you take a look at http://www.ziv.org/ziv_links.html, you'll see a whole page of charities for Selfish Jews, like the one which raises money to keep poor Pakistani children from being used as child labor (but, your feeble mind says, that's helping poor workers AND Muslims! Those dastardly Jews, always trying to cover for themselves!). And those Muslim-hating Jews in Israel were among the first countries to offer support to the Muslim Kosovo refugees, far earlier than any of the Arab nations did.
I could go on and on with examples that refute your stupid bigotry. But hate-filled people like yourself won't listen, and those that understand that your head is filled with straw don't need the examples.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
See, this I don't get. The land of Israel (ignoring the West Bank and Gaza) supports a population of roughly six million, a million of whom are Arabs. In 1948, the population of the part of Palestine which became Israel was WAY under a million. About 300,000 Arabs fled Israel and became refugees. Considering how many people are there now, population pressures wouldn't have forced out those people.
50 year later, there are 3 MILLION people who claim to be refugees. This is an astonishing population growth. It's also crap. My great-grandfather fled Russia to avoid pogroms. Does that mean that all of his descendants are entitled to land in Russia? If so, please tell me how to collect. If it will help me get sympathy, I'll move my family into a tent and throw rocks at Russian troops. Anyone care to bet whether or not they'll use live ammo?
And, of course, if the Arab countries hadn't kicked out so many Jews, then they wouldn't have come to Israel to displace Arabs.
Anyway, it's not like there were no Jews in Palestine, and the one day in 1948, five million showed up and killed any Arabs they found, forcing the rest to flee. There were Jews in Israel at the time of its founding, and there have always been Jews there. Relatively large numbers started to return in the 1880s, but Jews had been in places like Tiberias, Jerusalem, and Hebron for basically forever. It's just that after a couple of thousand years of persecution, it was realized that maybe having a place to call home wouldn't be a bad thing. In short, there wouldn't have been a Jewish homeland if one hadn't been needed.
And they live like blacks used to live in the US and South Africa.
I'm not aware of any "Arab-only" water fountains or lunch counters in Israel, and I don't recall ever hearing about black people holding public office in South Africa or the US when segration was in full force. But I could be wrong.
I'm not saying that life is perfect for Arabs in Israel; there is discrimination, and it's wrong. Israel has certainly taken away land from Arab residents without just compensation, and Arabs are excluded from many things (the army in particular), based on security concerns. But let's keep our facts straight.
The US is who is backing Israel. So their relative ineptitude with PR is not important.
Which is true for now, but I don't think the US is going to be backing Israel in 5-10 years, if things continue the way they are now. Would the US stand up to another oil boycott? Would Americans blame Israel (and Jews in general) for it? I think the answers are fairly obvious. I'm pretty sure that most Americans would give up support for Israel if it would knock a buck off the price of gas. I might be selling people short, but not by much. Maybe two bucks would be the cutoff point, I dunno.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
... it's Naderistic barbarians who shoot at businesses with lawsuits.
;-)
It reminds me of Harry Harrison's Eden trilogy where iilane had hesotsan (sp?) weapon, that was a live creature spitting poisonous darts. Sounds like a lawyer to me
Tigers respect lions, elephants and hippos. Maggots respect no one. (C) S. Dovlatov
But what about zion? Weren't the people in Zion the only people who weren't wired for computers?
Hopefully I didn't put any [] around my words.
Either us geeks get it together and launch a bunch of satellites and publish open source plans to fire bits at the skies, or more subversively, go back to the days of yore with WWIVnet/FIDO. OK sure, so we'd be going back to 14.4kbps, but hey, back then there were communities dammit and GTs... we had text based interfaces that worked, and downloading small interesting things was relatively simple.
So it'd be use the Internet for downloading the Linux ISO or reading pretty banner ads from the multinationals that now control who sees what by having hijacked ICANN, and for day to day power to the people use, go back to the Fido and WWIVnets.
--- Jump!! Fire!! Bullet time!! - Lego version of the Matrix
Just because a jew calls someone else a "jew hater" he is now anti-semitic (no proof ever required) and the posts are modded appropriately.
You're going to mod this post down anyway, just because I've hit a nerve. And because of that I'm going to repost the other guys URL of http://www.ihr.org so you can read some more about the jews. Gary
"Making linux GPL was the best thing I ever did" - Torvalds. I'd hate to see the worst thing...
Notice how the slashdot moderators modded the previous post up to 3 or more? Simply because it is a pro-jew post? In the same way they do the same for anything pro-linux or pro-transmeta. If it's Intel or Microsoft they get modded down.
Just because a jew calls someone else a "jew hater" he is now anti-semitic (no proof ever required) and the posts are modded appropriately.
You're going to mod this post down anyway, just because I've hit a nerve - you know full well you haven't got the balls to criticise the jews even if you wanted to (and I doubt you want to). And because of that I'm going to repost the other guys URL of http://www.ihr.org so you can read some more about the jews.
Gary
"Making linux GPL was the best thing I ever did" - Torvalds. I'd hate to see the worst thing...
I know you said 'collective you,' but I had to respond to remove myself from that group. I vote. I participate in the community. I educate people when I get a chance. I think I stop just short of running about with a crowbar, prying people's minds open. :-)
/."
"I'm not a bitch, I just play one on
The House Between - Original Sci-Fi Series
It's not a race-based state, but a religion-based state. Entirely different. It's as legal as Vatican City is. Anyone who wants to become a Jew can become a Jew. I've yet to hear of a way for a black person to become white, but science is always improving.
Sounds like there's horrible and pervasive racism still today: "Israel's Apartheid".
And yet the article mentions that there's an Arab justice on the Israeli Supreme Court, that Miss Israel is an Arab, and that the Supreme Court has ruled that anti-Arab discrimination is illegal. Like I said, it's not perfect and there's still discrimination, but it's not like South Africa.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mdeniers.html
And I'm always curious: why is it that anti-Semites deny the Holocaust happened? They keep running around, talking about killing Jews; you'd think they'd be proud of what Hitler and his goons did. But no, they deny it happened. Yet, they keep on saying that they'll kill all the Jews, if they get the chance. Odd.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
I think the stellar example of the expansion when the end of the Earth-centric universe model moved humanity from the centre of the universe to a speck on the edge of an unfashionable arm of a totally ordinary spiral galaxy explains the change in religion as you knew it. I could believe in a God that made me centre of the universe and promised me Heaven, but not one that reduces me to the least mote in all creation.
As for the 51st State, c'mon Jon, it's the eighth continent surely?
Fuck that---this is JUST what we need----more libertarian shit. Look, I'm every bit as anti-goverment as the next anarchist, but they conviently ignore the role of the capitalist class in the oppression of the individual.