Summary
In this Chapter, Woodhouse goes into one grander solution to the problems with the U.S.'s current democracy discussed in Chapter 9: an Internet-Based democracy where every single adult citizen would have the means to have themselves heard on every decision the government makes. The basic outline is a discussion center completely online where forums and meetings can be held; each citizen gains authority by getting involved in discussions and gain ranking and credibility based on traits like thoughtfulness, speaking skills, ability to keep discussion on track, and knowledge base. Mediators would be chosen based on high ranking and expertise in the topic area for the discussion they are mediating. He also discusses a better face-to-face system where the population of the world is broken into levels, beginning with a group of about 10 neighbors or friends. They discuss issues and send one person up to the next level, forming a new group of 10, and so on, until the 500 groups that each send one person to a final group, which makes the decision. This way everyone who is able to vote has a say and He argues that with one or both of these, while far from flawless, will be a democracy far closer to our original intention of "of the people, by the people, for the people".
Analysis & Synthesis
One of the biggest advantages I see to Woodhouse's internet democracy is the potential to draw in younger voters. Most of the college-age people I talk to about politics are interested in it sheerly because of the effect politics has on our daily lives. The registering and voting process, the head figures, the campaigns, the obvious unfairness and name-games...all of that is taboo and inhibits my friends from getting involved. The internet democracy sweeps that away. It makes the complex and formal process of getting involved simple by putting it in a format young voters are familiar with (Woodhouse describes the format being similar to those of Reddit, Twitter, Wikipedia). The conflicts and meetings are no longer far away. Having your say doesn't involve years of law school and campaigning, signing a petition that goes who-knows-where in the mail or email, going through formal voting, or spending money to join protests or marches; it's literal, physical, and there's no hoaxes. Once you're in a discussion, it's your voice directly into the conversation, and that's it. There's no head figures other than the moderator, who doesn't have a higher say than you. Finally, a systematic change that will bring young voters forward, because clearly even having a campaign that reaches out to the problems the younger population faces isn't enough.
Currently most U.S. politicians are white, male, and in their mid-40s. The majority of voters that participate in the elections are over the age of 50. Even if these decision makers keep up to date with technology, the majority of their lifetimes are not and will not be shaped by the technology being released and incorporated into our lives. This is crucial, because "the cardinal rule of
social science is that people's thoughts and behaviors are shaped
substantially by their circumstances" (121). Should those who did not get a cell phone until their 30's decide cell phone usage laws? Should those who used dial-up internet their adult life make decisions on wifi policies and rights laws? I believe the young voters (18-30) who are going to be dealing with the ramifications for decades longer than those in power and have spent their whole lives involved in the new technology should have the spotlight in those decisions. The speed of innovation has been a major topic of the reading for this course, and in order to make up-to-date and fully informed decisions that allow us to keep up with the technology we need to get out of legacy thinking. Parents want to shape a good world for their children, but what about children shaping the world for themselves? In general I would say people (at least parents) want to make decisions that leave the world a better place for the following generations, but maybe the best way to do that is creating a system that allows each generation to shape the world in its own best interest, according to their own circumstances. After all, wouldn't you rather make your own decision than have someone else make it for you?
