Re: <nettime> forwarded flight forwards

["geert lovink" <geert@xs4all.nl>]

 I read the Flight Forwards text as a pamphlet, a strategy paper, more than
anything else. Like most of the Dutch initiatives in this direction, it
lacks theory, analysis, key concepts, references to authors, events,
previous discussions etc. That's all fine. It was not meant as an academic
contribution to an ongoing debate. It is attempt to move forward, to
create a new consensus, and new alliances and coalitions, in a very Dutch
way of common sense and good will. Elsewhere people can perhaps only
repeat the same old arguments, unable to envision a different, unexpected
future - a vision on which policy of goverments, institutions, companies,
NGOs and individuals can be based. This is a very valuable aspect of such
a working document. It is easy to decontruct Flight Forwards and throw in
into the shredder of cynical reason.. This is not my intension. Although an
irresponsible critique wouldn't be... It's a fun to read, as long as lacks
the bitterness and pumps up the hilarious aspects of our own belief
system.

Having put this text in its proper cultural context, there is a certain
naivity about the world in Flight Forwards, which, in my view, could
backfire on the initiative and its participants. We all know that the
world is not run by good intensions, but by political and economic power,
money, religion. It is therefor questionable why exactly the Internet (and
some other contemporary phenomena like pop culture), in its period of
hyper growth, becoming a mainstream mass medium and a tool for business,
all of the sudden should not be affected by the current condition.

>         People and information will continue to spread. Any attempt to
> prevent this is blocking society in a development which cannot be
> stopped. Time is running out for prohibition. You cannot unplug the
> internet. There is no more authority that can forbid you to spread
> information.

I think is unwise and naive to continue to spread this libertarian
belief system. Information can very well be filtered, censored,
marginalized. Also in the Internet. People can be frightened,
intimidated not to go to certain sites, not to write down their
opinions on public forums. They will become silent users.
Perfect consumers who shut up and do their on-line shopping.
This is the ideal condition for the corporate world to harvest
all desires, narrow down the back channels to the required minimum
of relevant consumer data.
And Kosov@, East-Timor and many more place have already
proven that is it very easy for authorities to unplug the Internet.
See the situation of B92 in April and May 1999. Yes, we can
fight this isolation, and perhaps find ways to smuggle out some bits
and pieces of information. But do not underestimate the powers to be.
The have now discovered the Internet as well, and start to learn too.
I think some more of these dynamic, feedback loops could be
integrated in the way of arguing here. The world is not static, neither
is the Internet. There is no such thing as an inherently democratic
computer network. The very basic, open standards of communication
are now under pressure, and might belong to the heroic past soon.


#  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