Computer Professionals & The Next Culture of Democracy
The growing gap between the elite, wealthy, and powerful groups in society and the marginalized, disenfranchised groups jeopardizes the factionalism founder James Madison felt was good for democracy. As Schuler (p. 1) asserts, ôas the domination by large economic interests increases, the idea of rough equality that democracy represents becomes increasingly degraded.ö Factionalism argued that competing interest groups fighting for resources would result in a checks and balances system that would promote democracy. Until the advent of the Internet and World Wide Web, this system of democracy was in jeopardy. Connecting people symmetrically and inexpensively, the Internet is viewed by many, according to Schuler (p. 1) as the ôdashing hero who will rescue democracy from its lingering malaise.ö Despite the perception of the InternetÆs utopian-like impact on democracy, Schuler (p. 2) warns that the this view is misguided, not supported by historyÆs use of communication forms, and may not result in the promotion of greater ôcivic culture.ö
If Schuler looks with skepticism and cynicism at the potential for the ability of the Internet to promote democracy and egalitarian civic participation, he does so with good reason. For the author argues that one of the main reasons the Internet is viewed as the utopia of participatory democracy is because it is viewed as being immune to the ôpowerful economic, political, and social systems, which were responsibleàfor [its] existence in the first place,ö (Schuler, p. 2). Indeed, Schuler contends that throughout history other new forms of communication like radio, TV, and others were viewed in a similar manner as the Internet. However, in turn, each of these new forms of communication is maintained and controlled, both in access and content, by powerful, wealthy groups that control society.
The conflict theory of social pro...