09-06-2011, 07:53 PM
An article by Kurt Mills, Ph.D. entitled "Cybernations: Identity, Self-Determination, Democracy and the Internet Effect' in the Emerging Information Order"....; a slightly revised and edited version of that article was published in Global Society, Vol. 16 (January 2002).
"Benedict Anderson's characterization of community as "deep, horizontal comradeship" [3] -a connection, a fraternity, an idea that bonds people together-is useful here. The argument is that such bonds can be created in the aether of bits and bytes, as well as in other types of interaction. That is, the interactions that occur in cyberspace can, in some instances, contribute to that comradeship. As Anderson points out, members of communities never have the opportunity to meet most of the other members. These communities are thus "imagined communities": "the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the power of their communion" [4]. Given that all communities are imagined, constructed in the minds of the members, it is thus not surprising that such communities could appear or be strengthened in cyberspace.
Why is this? Cyberspace replicates, at least in part, the conditions under which certain types of interactions which are necessary for communities to arise and be sustained take place. Ray Oldenburg argues that there are three main "places" people inhabit-places to live, places of work, and places of conviviality. The last, so-called "third place", refers to the Agora of ancient Greece, the place where people engage in casual conversation which includes not only idle chatter, but also the vital discussion of public issues which affect everybody. These third places, which provide "'psychological comfort and support,'" are receding, and nowhere more than in the US as communities have started to come apart at the seams as a result of mall culture, among other factors. [5] Malls have replaced cafés, Chilis™ has replaced Cheers™, a mass market gathering place substitutes for the corner bar "where everybody knows your name". Of course, such developments occur far beyond the US, as mass market globalization undermines or replaces traditional "Agoras" worldwide. Online communities provide space for these third places, "places of conviviality," virtual Agoras where people can participate in public discussions and engage in many of the other interactions which are necessary for psychological well-being. As I will argue below, it may be that the potential for cyberspace to provide "virtual" Agoras for "real" communities will prove to be one of its most enduring legacies by supporting the connected, yet contradictory, processes of the reification and the realignment of communal affiliation and identity."
"Andrew Shapiro [Andrew L. Shapiro, The Control Revolution: How the Internet is Putting Individuals in Charge and Changing the World (New York: PublicAffairs: 1999), pp. 116-20.] argues that new communications technologies have led to what he terms a "control revolution." Because individuals can bypass the gatekeepers of information-states, the traditional media-control of information, resources, and experience is passing from large institutions to individuals. This will help disenfranchised groups get their word out and organize. But, it will also allow individuals to increasingly cut themselves off from information they may not want to hear. It is increasingly possible to tell your computer to deliver to you only what news you want to hear-you can very narrowly define the topics you read about or the sources from which you get your information. This personalization and "hyper-individualism" could have the potential of directly undermining the shared information, perspectives, and understandings that under gird a feeling of nationhood. Thus, while global communications technology may expand our horizons far beyond the borders of our state, it may also have the opposite effect-contract our boundaries of experience and sympathy to smaller and smaller groups and much more narrow perspectives."
"…the Internet shrinks time and space such that borders "virtually" disappear and appear significantly less relevant to the construction of identities and communities and allegiances. Although it is certainly possible to overstate the degree to which the development of instantaneous global [22] communication relegates borders to the dust heap of history -- certainly access to concrete, life-sustaining resources can still be determined by which side of a fence you are on -- the myths [23] which support the territorial (nation-)state now coexist with, and in some instances are being partially replaced by, other transnational, global myths."
"…the role of the Internet Effect … demonstrates rather forcefully the inability of states to tame digital communication. It may be in this type of situation where the potential of the Internet for undermining state authority, and enhancing self-determination movements will be most dramatically illustrated. And the process of "unbundling" identity from the state and repackaging it will accelerate as more of the world logs on, thus undermining, in some instances, the authority claims of states."
The article is cited in many places; the above originally appeared in my blog http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/f...57&&st=360
"Benedict Anderson's characterization of community as "deep, horizontal comradeship" [3] -a connection, a fraternity, an idea that bonds people together-is useful here. The argument is that such bonds can be created in the aether of bits and bytes, as well as in other types of interaction. That is, the interactions that occur in cyberspace can, in some instances, contribute to that comradeship. As Anderson points out, members of communities never have the opportunity to meet most of the other members. These communities are thus "imagined communities": "the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the power of their communion" [4]. Given that all communities are imagined, constructed in the minds of the members, it is thus not surprising that such communities could appear or be strengthened in cyberspace.
Why is this? Cyberspace replicates, at least in part, the conditions under which certain types of interactions which are necessary for communities to arise and be sustained take place. Ray Oldenburg argues that there are three main "places" people inhabit-places to live, places of work, and places of conviviality. The last, so-called "third place", refers to the Agora of ancient Greece, the place where people engage in casual conversation which includes not only idle chatter, but also the vital discussion of public issues which affect everybody. These third places, which provide "'psychological comfort and support,'" are receding, and nowhere more than in the US as communities have started to come apart at the seams as a result of mall culture, among other factors. [5] Malls have replaced cafés, Chilis™ has replaced Cheers™, a mass market gathering place substitutes for the corner bar "where everybody knows your name". Of course, such developments occur far beyond the US, as mass market globalization undermines or replaces traditional "Agoras" worldwide. Online communities provide space for these third places, "places of conviviality," virtual Agoras where people can participate in public discussions and engage in many of the other interactions which are necessary for psychological well-being. As I will argue below, it may be that the potential for cyberspace to provide "virtual" Agoras for "real" communities will prove to be one of its most enduring legacies by supporting the connected, yet contradictory, processes of the reification and the realignment of communal affiliation and identity."
"Andrew Shapiro [Andrew L. Shapiro, The Control Revolution: How the Internet is Putting Individuals in Charge and Changing the World (New York: PublicAffairs: 1999), pp. 116-20.] argues that new communications technologies have led to what he terms a "control revolution." Because individuals can bypass the gatekeepers of information-states, the traditional media-control of information, resources, and experience is passing from large institutions to individuals. This will help disenfranchised groups get their word out and organize. But, it will also allow individuals to increasingly cut themselves off from information they may not want to hear. It is increasingly possible to tell your computer to deliver to you only what news you want to hear-you can very narrowly define the topics you read about or the sources from which you get your information. This personalization and "hyper-individualism" could have the potential of directly undermining the shared information, perspectives, and understandings that under gird a feeling of nationhood. Thus, while global communications technology may expand our horizons far beyond the borders of our state, it may also have the opposite effect-contract our boundaries of experience and sympathy to smaller and smaller groups and much more narrow perspectives."
"…the Internet shrinks time and space such that borders "virtually" disappear and appear significantly less relevant to the construction of identities and communities and allegiances. Although it is certainly possible to overstate the degree to which the development of instantaneous global [22] communication relegates borders to the dust heap of history -- certainly access to concrete, life-sustaining resources can still be determined by which side of a fence you are on -- the myths [23] which support the territorial (nation-)state now coexist with, and in some instances are being partially replaced by, other transnational, global myths."
"…the role of the Internet Effect … demonstrates rather forcefully the inability of states to tame digital communication. It may be in this type of situation where the potential of the Internet for undermining state authority, and enhancing self-determination movements will be most dramatically illustrated. And the process of "unbundling" identity from the state and repackaging it will accelerate as more of the world logs on, thus undermining, in some instances, the authority claims of states."
The article is cited in many places; the above originally appeared in my blog http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/f...57&&st=360
"Where is the intersection between the world's deep hunger and your deep gladness?"