Re: Govt & cyberspace

[snip]
"tech envy"-- what impact is this going to have on our government? it's becoming a huge issue. it may be a really great opportunity for a populist movement to truly reform the government in the process of upgrading their computers.
Even better, this is an opportunity to choke off all, or certainly increased, funding in order to hasten its collapse.
I suspect that the "groupware" technology that is just getting started will have major influence in these areas. as private companies find increasingly sophisticated ways of managing themselves, the obvious question will arise, "why can't we have an efficient govt when our private industries are"? the answer is, we can!!
Don't improve it, remove it!
I've written about "electronic democracy" repeatedly. many people object to the idea. but when it is phrased in terms of groupware, it becomes more palatable. imagine a small company humming along with its groupware application that allows it to make company-wide decisions using a democratic process. moreover, the software is robust and scales well. why can't the same principles be scaled up, up, up? I predict that they will be in a rather extraordinary revolution.
a new "velvet revolution"? comments anyone?
Democracy is not without its significant shortcomings. If you doubt this read Tocquevelle. --Steve

Steve writes:
Democracy is not without its significant shortcomings. If you doubt this read Tocquevelle.
Or Hayek. Democracy, after all, is majoritarian rule. Living under a homogenous majority, with its whims and desires as law, would be more oppressive than living under a benign dictatorship. -Declan ------------------------- The Netly News Network Washington Correspondent http://netlynews.com/

Declan McCullagh wrote:
Steve writes:
Democracy is not without its significant shortcomings. If you doubt this read Tocquevelle.
Or Hayek. Democracy, after all, is majoritarian rule. Living under a homogenous majority, with its whims and desires as law, would be more oppressive than living under a benign dictatorship.
I wish for once and for all someone would delineate this "democracy" thing from a true, distributed democracy, where every individual is required to participate equally, and no narrow interests can co-opt the vote the way they do in the kind of "democracy" Declan mentions. Wouldn't it be better when people mention a one-word political philosophy such as democracy, that they make the definition more precise by using two or three words instead?
participants (3)
-
Dale Thorn
-
Declan McCullagh
-
Steve Schear