So where to next?

simplistic

So we have had democracy, communism, fascism etc.

So where do you guys think we are headed next? Is there any new ideas that look like springing to life?
Or is democracy our final stop well as soon as America is done spreading it at the barrel of a gun.

KonFusion

I think history repeats....a bit like fashion...

I'd be very surprised if totalitarianism didn't raise its ugly head some point this century...

assuming you think it hasn't already...*continues scrawling conspiricy theories*

simplistic

Ha, well of course its possible , but Ireland can you imagine it happening Brian cowen slamming his fists on a podium out side the dail wrapped in a finna fail flag demanding that citizens throw themselves into a giant furnace to reignite the economy!!

On a side note I wonder if there is connection between religious nations that believe in that one missiah and dictatorships?

nyarlothothep

Cyber anarchism is so in right now.

simplistic

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Cyber anarchism is so in right now.

Great point, the internet is anarchy and look how it amazes the world!!!

Red Hand

Well, such regimes as communism and fascism have killed many people as part of their ideology. In fact, people are killing each other every day with no idealogy in mind...out of fun, for money/food, or as part of their routine.

So, the nest step, is an idealogical movement for humans to kill themselves. When I came across this, I pictured suicide booths on every street like in Futurama or from one of Kurt Vonnegut's books.:pac:

http://www.vhemt.org/

Black Swan

simplistic wrote: »

Great point, the internet is anarchy and look how it amazes the world!!!

If the “internet is anarchy,” is it not curious that it relies heavily upon an infrastructure of government regulated university and corporate installed and maintained servers, routers, switches, hubs, cables, fibre optics, telephone lines, satellites, bandwidths, etc.? Further, that access for most users is obtained through ISP middlemen (Internet Service Providers) that you must pay or be cut off from your Internet anarchy?

There are certainly exceptions, such as hackers that circumvent the Great Firewall of China through the use of offshore proxies, or war drivers that pirate unsecured wifi access points in our neighborhoods (that other users must pay for), or visitors to free wifi hotspots (which are not really free, because they expect you to buy coffee or something), but these are exceptions, not the rule for most users.

Is it not also ironic that the architecture of this “internet is anarchy” is based upon highly standardized and structured coding systems and programming languages (HTML, XHTML, XML, Java, etc.)? Even if you depart somewhat creatively with open source coding, you must still comply with the highly structured requirements of interfacing with different computer platforms and operating systems? This makes me wonder if Ferdinand de Saussure and Levi-Strauss would have something to add on how language structures interaction, or how Jacques Derrida might deconstruct their message while adding value (if they were still alive)?

For a moment in time I fantasized about lacing this post with hardcore pornographic images, raunchy profanity (without using the s**t workaround) , and attacking the poster’s character rather than addressing the issue, along with a few non-PC statements tossed in to inflame many a reader, but realized that the “internet is (not) anarchy” on boards.ie, but is structured in ways to promote interactive discussion on issues and fun topics, while at the same time promoting civility between posters.

"So where to next?" Although the Internet may inform social change in many ways, I doubt that anarchy will be the ultimate outcome of our Brave New World.

nyarlothothep

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the “internet is anarchy,” is it not curious that it relies heavily upon an infrastructure of government regulated university and corporate installed and maintained servers, routers, switches, hubs, cables, fibre optics, telephone lines, satellites, bandwidths, etc.? Further, that access for most users is obtained through ISP middlemen (Internet Service Providers) that you must pay or be cut off from your Internet anarchy?

There are certainly exceptions, such as hackers that circumvent the Great Firewall of China through the use of offshore proxies, or war drivers that pirate unsecured wifi access points in our neighborhoods (that other users must pay for), or visitors to free wifi hotspots (which are not really free, because they expect you to buy coffee or something), but these are exceptions, not the rule for most users.

Is it not also ironic that the architecture of this “internet is anarchy” is based upon highly standardized and structured coding systems and programming languages (HTML, XHTML, XML, Java, etc.)? Even if you depart somewhat creatively with open source coding, you must still comply with the highly structured requirements of interfacing with different computer platforms and operating systems? This makes me wonder if Ferdinand de Saussure and Levi-Strauss would have something to add on how language structures interaction, or how Jacques Derrida might deconstruct their message while adding value (if they were still alive)?

For a moment in time I fantasized about lacing this post with hardcore pornographic images, raunchy profanity (without using the s**t workaround) , and attacking the poster’s character rather than addressing the issue, along with a few non-PC statements tossed in to inflame many a reader, but realized that the “internet is (not) anarchy” on boards.ie, but is structured in ways to promote interactive discussion on issues and fun topics, while at the same time promoting civility between posters.

"So where to next?" Although the Internet may inform social change in many ways, I doubt that anarchy will be the ultimate outcome of our Brave New World.

With regards to php boards I think while they're not a perfect approximation to a libertarian environment they're somewhat close to it, there are rules agreed upon by most for the benefit and security of all, moderators aren't democratically elected so far as I know but if enough users were sufficiently annoyed at how the site was run they could just take their business elsewhere and change would be necessitated if traffic was to be maintained and for the community to survive. Its not perfect as I say but the power structure if you want to call it that is more closer to a communal consensus than in the "real world." Anarchy to my mind isn't chaos, its just the decentralization of power and while this is at odds with what I'm describing at one level, on another I think that power is very much dependent on consensus among the people who use such boards, its not alienated from them, there is input, give and take.

With ISPs and infrastructure, while they are centralized, paid for and so forth the product of all this is different at least in the West. There are moves to combat this but its a libertarian environment for information, something you don't get with centralized media institutions. The ISPs are reluctant for example to comply with the demands of the record industry to block sites like pirate bay, I'm not defending the rights or wrongs of this.

I agree that its not a pure anarchy (in fact I don't think a pure "anything" is achievable in this reality), but I fail to see how standardization when its benign is at odds with libertarianism where it matters.

Ostrom

Blue_Lagoon wrote: »

If the “internet is anarchy,” is it not curious that it relies heavily upon an infrastructure of government regulated university and corporate installed and maintained servers, routers, switches, hubs, cables, fibre optics, telephone lines, satellites, bandwidths, etc.? Further, that access for most users is obtained through ISP middlemen (Internet Service Providers) that you must pay or be cut off from your Internet anarchy?

There are certainly exceptions, such as hackers that circumvent the Great Firewall of China through the use of offshore proxies, or war drivers that pirate unsecured wifi access points in our neighborhoods (that other users must pay for), or visitors to free wifi hotspots (which are not really free, because they expect you to buy coffee or something), but these are exceptions, not the rule for most users.

Is it not also ironic that the architecture of this “internet is anarchy” is based upon highly standardized and structured coding systems and programming languages (HTML, XHTML, XML, Java, etc.)? Even if you depart somewhat creatively with open source coding, you must still comply with the highly structured requirements of interfacing with different computer platforms and operating systems? This makes me wonder if Ferdinand de Saussure and Levi-Strauss would have something to add on how language structures interaction, or how Jacques Derrida might deconstruct their message while adding value (if they were still alive)?

For a moment in time I fantasized about lacing this post with hardcore pornographic images, raunchy profanity (without using the s**t workaround) , and attacking the poster’s character rather than addressing the issue, along with a few non-PC statements tossed in to inflame many a reader, but realized that the “internet is (not) anarchy” on boards.ie, but is structured in ways to promote interactive discussion on issues and fun topics, while at the same time promoting civility between posters.

"So where to next?" Although the Internet may inform social change in many ways, I doubt that anarchy will be the ultimate outcome of our Brave New World.

And yet the nature of harmonious system interdependency comes close to satisfying Kropotkin's assumptions.