Ronda Hauben on Sat, 10 Jun 2000 03:32:28 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> E-government or creating a public sphere |
Norman Solomon, in an article "E-Government": Point-and-Click Democracy? wrote: >In a country such as Singapore or Egypt, the e-government pretensions are >likely to be transparent. In the United States, the pronouncements of >politicians and media commentators are apt to encounter credulous >enthusiasm when we confuse convenience with democracy -- and technical >advances with civic ones. It is appropriate to be critical of Al Gore's claims to being a founding father of a new form of democracy that he calls e-government, just as he is promoting the privatizing of the Internet's infrastructure out of the public hands and into the hands of the vested interests. Also it is important to remember that his slogan for internet development is "the private sector will lead." We have seen where they have led Internet development since 1995. In the US this has meant millions for dot.com speculation, and poor people taxed on their phone bills to pay for minimal internet access for schools. But that's somehow secondary to the fact that the concept of "Netizen" as someone who is a new form of networking citizen and one who does what they can to make it possible for the Internet to grow and flourish, that this concept grew up and spread round the world in opposition to the Gore concept of "the private sector will lead". So while it is appropriate to question what Gore is planning for the world with his calls for e-government, it isn't appropriate to question what will be the response of Netizens both in the US and around the world to the lack of understanding by Gore and other government officials of the nature and power for democracy of the Internet. US industry advisors to government try to keep government officials ignorant of the nature of the Internet and of the science that has made it possible to create the Internet. And the US press for the most part goes along with this effort. The challenge is to have a public discussion online and off of what is needed for the kind of increased democracy that the Internet makes possible. In "Netizen: On the History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet" http://www.columbia.edu/~hauben/netbook/ we begin this process. Also it is important that people online who care about the Internet and about democratic processes take on to challenge the Gore program of "the private sector leads" in Internet development. If the Clinton administration succeeds in giving the infrastructure of the Internet to the private sector, what public resources will they try to give to the private sector next? The Internet was developed by science and science supported by government (or as part of government), and science needs to lead the way. This is the real challenge that Gore and other public officials should be considering and learning about. We need a scientific institution within the US government like the Information Processing Techniques Office which made it possible to create the Internet. We need a scientific institution inside the US government to protect the infrastructure of the US portion of the Internet from vested interests and which would give leadership and support for the needed scaling of the Internet. (See http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/arpa_ipto.txt) This is the challenge for Gore and by taking on this challenge he would be in a position to give advice to other countries about how to protect and scale the infrastructure of the Internet in their countries. The creation by the US Clinton administration of ICANN is contrary to US law as it is putting public functions in private hands. This gives a hint at what kind of e-government that vested interests are pressuring Gore to provide for them. And this presents a challenge to the US government to understand why the U.S. government-corporate control act to stem abuses that come from putting government functions into unaccountable private sector ownership and control is a law that should be followed and ICANN should be acknowledged as an illegal entity under that law. The Internet presents important challenges for government officials, and they need a vibrant public discussion to begin to recognize what these challenges are. It is good to see that such discussion is beginning. Ronda ronda@ais.org # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net