Slashdot Mirror
Governmental Transparency?
CosmicDreams asks: "With our concern about transparency in business transactions these days, should we focus on what is arguably the largest business of all, government? Today, it is possible to build a system in which the official interactions (social, fiscal, and oral) of our elected officials can be presented to world in an uncensored, unspinned, and quick-to-market medium. Unlike talk radio, newspapers, and late night stand-up routines, only the internet can possibly supply the public which a near instantaneous collection of news in sheer bulk form. What would the effects of such a system be on America and the world? I would be interested in hearing opinions on this matter."
... but it will only ever happen if We The People (for those outside the US, insert patriotic identifier for yourself and your fellow citizens here) stand up and demand it. And the way to do that is by voting for politicians who have an understanding of the value of implementing such a technology. In 2000, we did vote for such a candidate -- to forestall any stupid "invented the internet" jokes, I'm going to say that yes, damn it, Al Gore did have as much as any politican possibly could to bring the internet into existence, at a time when George W. Bush probably barely had any idea what a computer was -- but legal machinations prevented him from taking the office to which he was rightfully elected.
Good luck changing things now. Once-free overnments all over the world are moving in the direction of less openness, not more. In the US, the Freedom of Information Act is just about dead as a consequence of the "War On (Drugs/Terror/Iraq/villain of the month)". The irony is, of course, that at least some repressive governments are opening up, just a bit; at this point, I honestly wouldn't be surprised if we see electronically open government in China before we see it in the US, or Great Britain, or France, or Germany, or Japan. (Depressed, but not surprised.)
Once upon a time, the US government was taking steps in this direction. FOIA requests, even by e-mail, were answered more often than not. Sites like FedStats still remain as monuments to a genuine initiative, during the last decade, to making the government's vast store of information a resoucre of the people, by the people, and for the people. Enjoy it while you can, folks, because right now the trend is toward taking this stuff away, not expanding it.
And for God's sake, keep voting. The fraud machinery that stole the 2000 election is powerful, but it's not unbeatable. Yet.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
This much information is almost already available online, but there is way too much to absorb. The average idiot would just be confused by it all, and fall back on talk radio and the idiot box to spoonfeed beliefs and views. Money would still talk, bullshit would still walk. More freely flowing information would be no threat to American oligarchy.
How ya like dat?
People would block out the information overload.
The majority of voters vote in herds, they have their own problems day-to-day, and instead of reading up on the issues, they follow the opinions of their friends, family, and church. Failing that they go based on the pictures of what people look like, or where a candidate is located on the card.
People who have an issue will go in to vote for that issue. But what happens when there are 50 unrelated issues on the ballot you haven't heard of?
The best solution might be electronic voting booths, where you can research the topics and look up words while voting (In a reasonable amount of time).
The point is, it would be easy to find and access the raw information if you needed or wanted to. If you were researching a subject, or really cared to get to the bottom of it, you could go find the raw information, without the biases of your lawyer, the nightly news, or slashdot.
"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance." - Thomas Jefferson