MOTHER JONES BY E-MAIL

Crashing The System

News: Are we entering a new era of digital democracy—or just being conned by a bunch of smooth-talking geeks?

June 20, 2007


TOOLS

EmailE-mail article
PrintPrint article




BACKTALK

E-mail the editor





Google


RELATED ARTICLES

Google "open-source politics" and among the top hits is a November 2004 Nation article by writer and campaign-reform activist Micah Sifry. In it, Sifry recalled a seminal moment early in Howard Dean's presidential run when a staffer posted an "Ask the Dean Campaign" thread on the anti-Bush website Smirking Chimp. Within a day, there were 400 comments—a lot at the time—many of them professing amazement that campaign staffers were actually responding. "Never before had the top-down world of presidential campaigning been opened to a bottom-up, laterally networked community of ordinary voters," Sifry wrote.

Of course, Dean lost. But the following year, Iraq veteran Paul Hackett almost knocked off a powerful incumbent congressman in Ohio thanks to the liberal blogosphere. By the 2006 election cycle, MoveOn was able to raise almost $1 million in a single day, "macaca" felled Virginia Senator George Allen, and on Election Day Senate Majority Leader-to-be Harry Reid posted a personal message on Daily Kos thanking the site's users. These days, D.C. sounds like Silicon Valley circa 1998, with everyone peddling some New New Thing.

But what, really, is new? At best, the potential exists for the political equivalent of software's open-source movement: a system in which the best results are accomplished not by secretive, commercial, top-down, individual effort but by communities of interested people wielding collective, uncopyrighted, free, and yes, democratic tools. Open-source politics is about more than having a MySpace page or courting the blogosphere. It's about a different notion of leadership, says Peter Leyden of the netroots-focused New Politics Institute: "The 20th century was the cult of the artiste, the director, the president or the CEO, the mad genius who knows everything and controls everything. But the way our economy works now, the way our media works now—it's increasingly made up of all kinds of people contributing at all different levels. Why wouldn't our politics work like that, too?"

Why not? Well, mostly because politics today is antithetical to the open-source principle in every way. It is about controlling the candidate, controlling the message, controlling who participates when, where, and how, down to—as Karl Rove has so well demonstrated—tailoring door-knocking strategies with the help of consumer credit card data. It is about lobbyists, donors, bundlers, consultants, ad makers, and the rest of the political-industrial complex. Why would this crowd suddenly abdicate to the crowd? In fact, it's evident it won't: This spring's much-hyped new-politics moment, the "Hillary 1984" ad, came courtesy of a political consultant (see The Attack Ad's Second Life). In May, Barack Obama, whose campaign built a social-networking site before he even announced, unceremoniously grabbed control of the hyperpopular Obama MySpace page a fan had painstakingly built (see Stupid Tech Tricks). In the space of a few short years, some bloggers have become remarkably Boss Tweed-like (see Meet the New Bosses). And thus far all this digital-democracy stuff involves, at best, a tiny portion of the voting-age population and skews heavily white and male. So isn't this just a slightly younger, hipper, and more chaotic version of the same old circus?

Politics 2.0: Ready or Not

READY:
  1. Podcasts of Kos diarists grilling candidates
  2. Stephen Colbert's "Better Know a Candidate" series
  3. Rudy Giuliani on The Surreal Life
  4. War-room webcams
  5. Candidates fisking opponents' speeches
  6. Bill Clinton on Twitter
NOT READY:
  1. Hillary ring tone
  2. Kucinich avatar
  3. Sam Brownback on The Surreal Life
  4. Stump speech MySpace shout-outs
  5. Gingrich's eHarmony profile
  6. Trading votes for casual encounters on Craigslist

—Greg Veis

Open-source politics has the potential to fundamentally change the way we govern ourselves—to fulfill the democratic promise that Web 1.0 pioneers dreamed of before they grabbed for the ipo brass ring. It also has the potential to become exactly what Web 1.0 turned into—a delivery system where most of us are mere "customers." To get a sense of what's hype and what's real, we surveyed bloggers, politicos, and all manner of netizens. The full interviews can be found here; excerpts appear throughout this package.

Illustration By: Tim Bower



 

Post a Comment

Your Name: 

Your Comment: 
 
Please press "Submit" only once to avoid double-posting.
All HTML formatting is removed from comments.
Read the Mother Jones community rules here.

Comments:

The more thing change the more they stay the same. Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss. Its still a bunch of middle aged white guys with above average incomes complaining to each other
Posted by:Marlene BundyJune 26, 2007 10:59:42 AMRespond ^
The more information the better. I'm not even for political parties. I vote on issues. I am excited that more information has the potential for more informed voting. I do not know who is interested in "open source" or whether the dialogue will be "a dialogue." So much of the dialogue is not one. Just more labelling. Information translates (hopefully) into informed voting. I don't know who wants to "know," but for me, the middle voter runs the show. Hopefully, this crowd wants the information, rather than reflexively following or towing a party line.
Posted by:SteveJune 29, 2007 4:17:55 PMRespond ^
Who wrote this?
Posted by:Where is the byline?July 6, 2007 9:59:18 AMRespond ^
New media offers more freedom of speech and that does improve democracy. But it may also mean fragmented media field and thus more chances for narrow-minded and biased opinions to gain ground too. In order to prevent the polarization of political speech and climate, main stream political media, including publications like Mother Jones, should offer more chances to wide political discussion. In the end it is not very constructive if a couple of extreme political fractions just wage war against each other instead of constructive and critical discussion. There's only one world and we have to live there together, and everyone, also opposition, may have something positive to offer on the way to make this world a better place for us all.
Posted by:more democracy is goodJuly 6, 2007 12:36:33 PMRespond ^
Julie, you're right- but I found a way around that, a bit. I believe more people on line "chat" than blog, of course. Why not do both? One leads to the other. I go on line to some of my favorite chat rooms, or even try new ones, and my fellow chatters often view my profile. Either they enjoyed the conversation with me, or they liked or disliked my screen name (I always pick a unique one that stands out, but isn't offensive- like "ILOVEdissent"--most of these people who would perhaps never otherwise read a blog, they go to my profile- and POOF! there it is in red, white, and blue, my advocacy for independent media along with web sites for the likes of Democracy Now! and suggested reading. I explain the difference between mass media & independent media, etc. in my profile. I know I've got people talking about Democracy Now!, talk about getting informed (what a superlative news program)!! So it doesn't have to be a blog, when we chat, or even have a catchy profile, we can help to spread the word! I do this with my profiles and home pages under all of my screen names, you never know when someone is looking. And P.S.: perhaps most bloggers are white middle class men, but one of the most thoughtful blogs I've seen, and sincere too, where political discussion is encouraged, is posted by an African American man. He is doing his small part, as I am, to further discussion and start people thinking & talking. I can tell you I don't make 80K a year, but I read the blogs and comment. It's not just blogs; we can be active in chat/profiles/homepages, too!
Posted by:I LOVE dissentAugust 12, 2007 2:45:46 PMRespond ^
As this report was being researched, the Metagovernment Project was hatching at http://www.metagovernment.org By the beginning 2008, it promises to be open to public editing, and by 2009-10 it intends to start attempting to replace every government in the world. The project is aimed at guaranteeing that the inevitable move of governance to the internet will be made in an open, democratic fashion; instead of being implemented by Rupert Murdoch and/or Bill Gates.
Posted by:AnonymousOctober 1, 2007 5:29:17 PMRespond ^
I firmly believe the middle class of this country should form a new political party. It should be called the MIDDLECLASS PARTY. The middle class of this country does all of the work, we support those who cant help themselves, and continue to make the super rich richer. All without any real repersentation. IT IS TIME FOR US TO SHOW SOME BACKBONE AND TAKE MORE CONTROL OF OUR COUNTRY. FORGET ABOUT BEING DEM OR REP AS LONG AS CORPORATE AMERICA KEEPS US DIVIDED WE WILL NEVER SUCCEED IN TAKING THIS COUNRY BACK TO WHERE WE CAN ALL SAY PROULY SAY "I AM AN AMERICAN."
Posted by:Fred WhiteheadOctober 26, 2007 5:35:15 PMRespond ^

Jail.org - Inmate Search
Criminal records, instant public records & people search & current court records. www.jail.org

U.S. Public Records Search
Search County & State Court Records, Criminal records, Vital and Adoption Records www.PublicRecordsInfo.com

Records.com - People Search
Public Records and Background Checks. Instantly Search Criminal Records, Addresses and Court Records www.Records.com

Court Records & County Records
Find Instant Public Records, Criminal Records as Well as County Property Records Search. www.PublicRecordsIndex.com
















bookIN PRINT

CLICK HERE
for more great reading

headphones IN TUNE
New music every issue

CLICK TO LISTEN


This article has been made possible by the Foundation for National Progress, the Investigative Fund of Mother Jones, and gifts from generous readers like you.

© 2007 The Foundation for National Progress

About Us   Support Us   Advertise   Ad Policy   Privacy Policy   Contact Us   Subscribe   RSS