Sadly America is not prepared for the responsibility involved in an e-democracy. As exemplified in "Ignorant America: Just how stupid are we?" (http://www.alternet.org/news/90161/), there is "hard evidence pointing incontrovertibly to the conclusion that millions are embarrassingly ill-informed...and that we are living in an age of ignorance." Open access to individuals who do not care to inform themselves on political issues does not seem reasonable. Additionally, "a poll a few years ago found that only 20% [of Americans] know that there are 100 senators, though the number has remained constant the last half century". In my opinion, a quick trip to any Wal-mart should send shivers down the spine of anyone considering the benefits of an e-democracy. People are just not motivated to discover there own political opinions and seem to sponge off others for lack of their own persuasion. What would keep people from throwing the vote or responding with ridiculous laws, amendments, and therefore wasting all of our time and money?
This brings up the concern that implementing such a system of electronic democracy could have a high price tag. This would allow large corporations to possibly maintain a monopoly on the software and interface of the e-democracy. High finance could then have a stronghold on our own direct democracy, therefore, demeaning the system altogether.
One consideration I would be willing to entertain, would be that members of society could somehow earn the right to be part of the e-democracy. You would have to earn the right and want to be a member. This would be cost free and accessible to all with the motivation to attend a preparation course or such system of informational/educational process and be involved in the issues at hand. This would be a public service for anyone/everyone who wanted to become part of the "governing class".
No comments:
Post a Comment