Talk about E-Democracy - Research Paper Example

? Politics, technology and electronic democracy Politics, Technology & Electronic Democracy The introduction of internet has affected virtually everysegment of human life. Many people have the illusion that internet is capable of contributing only in the business and communication sectors. It should be noted that some of the Arab dictators in Middle East were thrown out from power recently, mainly because of the influence of social networks such as Facebook, Twitter etc. The talk about electronic democracy or e-democracy is growing everywhere now. “Electronic democracy, sometimes teledemocracy or digital democracy, are terms often used synonymously to refer to the use of information and communications technologies (ICTs) to connect politicians and citizens by means of information, voting, polling, or discussion”(Gronlund, 2001, p. 22). Internet is currently used extensively for paying various kinds of taxes penalties and also for registering votes. The spreading or electronic democracy is generally welcomed by people all over the world. However, sociologists have certain reservations in welcoming e-democracy whole-heartedly. “On one side, politicians and political activists talk enthusiastically about the possibility of a virtual polity in which the ideal of Ancient Greece is recreated; on the other side are those who fear for the destruction of democracy” (Street, 2012). This paper analyses the interactions between politics, technology and electronic democracy. Interactions between politics, technology and electronic democracy What strong democracy requires is a form of town meeting in which participation is direct yet communication is regional or even national.... The capabilities of the new technology can be used to strengthen civic education, guarantee equal access to information, and tie individuals and institutions into networks that will make real participatory discussion and debate possible across great distances. Thus for the first time we have an opportunity to create artificial town meetings among populations that could not otherwise communicate (London, 2012). The interactions between the individuals and groups are vital in strengthening democracy. It should be noted that these interactions will help people to critically analyze the policies and strategies of the government so that they may get proper awareness about the merits and demerits of the government. In autocratic countries such as China or North Korea, government may not encourage people to interact freely either through electronic media or through print media. In such countries, people will never get any opportunity to know what is going on outside. Knowledge about the developments in the external world will always help people to shape their thoughts in accordance with the requirements of the modern world. For example Hosni Mubarak and Gadhafi dictated Egypt and Libya respectively for the last 30 to 40 years. Unlike China, they failed to block the intrusions of electronic media from external sources. They never thought that the information passed through social networks may create any problems to their power and authority. However, what is happened in Libya, Egypt and Tunisia is history now. Many other Arab dictators are currently on the verge of elimination as the Arab revolution stimulated by the social networks is slowly spreading to other countries also. Technologies of all kinds have both direct and indirect impacts on the democratic life of a nation. On one level, technology serves as the substance of political dispute and negotiation—over technologies that create and destroy industries, over the ethics of technological applications, or over the appropriate level of government involvement in fostering new industries. On another level, technology serves as an essential (but only partial) tool in facilitating democratic government and its supporting administrative functions and institutions (Chen et al., n. d., p.2). Now, it is easy for the people to interact with the government instantly because of the spreading of technology. Moreover, it is possible for the public to know what is going on in the office of the political leaders now. According to Spirakis et al.,(2010), “e-government uses Information and Communication Technology to improve accessibility, effectiveness and responsibility” (Spirakis et al.,2010, p.75). For example, the chief minister Ommen Chandy of India’s southernmost state, Kerala has recently opened a website to live telecast all the activities going on in his office. People all over the world can contact his office anytime and moreover, they can easily find out whether the chief minister is present or not in his office at a particular time. The chief minister wanted to make all the functioning of his office transparent. “The live web streaming on the Chief Minister’s new website was inaugurated on July1, 2011. People can view live web cast of Chief Minister’s chamber and office round the clock by logging on to www.keralacm.gov.in”(Live Web cast of Chief Minister’s office, 2011). It should be noted that India is one of the largest democracies in the world and technology is playing a vital role in strengthening democratic norms in India. Even though America is the most developed democratic country in the world, no political leaders in America so far shown the courage to live telecast the activities going on in their office. According to Watson and Mundy (2001), “Democracy is effective when there is an unimpeded flow of information between citizens and government and there is a high level of authentic citizen participation in the political process” (Watson and Mundy,2001, p.27). According to Abraham Lincoln, democracy means a government of the people by the people and for the people. If that is true, then it is necessary to enhance the communication between the governments and the people. Proper communication between the government and the people will help the government to know about the interests of the people and shape its policies and strategies in accordance with it. In many democratic countries, politicians often interact with the public only during the election times. Once they voted to power by the people, they may forget about the interests of the people and function totally against the interests of the people. In electronic terms, e-democracy is the wide area network between the government and the people. This wide area network helps instant communications between the government and the people. It should be noted that before the introduction of electronic technologies, instant communication was impossible between the governments and the people. Print media has its own limitations in helping people to communicate effectively with the government. All these problems were eliminated by electronic media. Recently, so-called Web 2.0 applications, such as social networking and Wikipedia, have proven that it is possible for millions of users to collectively create meaningful content online. While these recent developments are not necessarily labeled e-democracy in the literature, they and related applications have the potential to fulfill the promise of breaking with the longstanding democratic trade-off between group size (direct mass voting on predefined issues) and depth of argument (deliberation and discourse in a small group) (Hilbert, 2009, p.87) Some people argue that it is illogical to make all the activities of the democratic governments transparent because of the possibility of misusing these facilities by antisocial elements. As in the case of most of the other technological innovations, e-democracy may also bring lot of inconveniences. Even though the basic principles of democracy remain same everywhere in the world, it is not necessary that a democratic principle in one country may be suitable to another country. It should be noted that majority of the countries are culturally different and it is impossible to cultivate all the democratic norms in one country in another country. For example, Americans have the freedom to wear clothes which may expose their body. It is impossible to restrict the freedom of people to wear the clothing of their liking in America. On the other hand, it is difficult to provide such freedom to people in a Muslim dominated democratic country. We can see full naked or half naked tourists in American beaches; however, it is impossible even for a democratic government to allow such freedoms in the beaches of Arab countries. It is difficult for the people of Pakistan or Saudi Arabia argue for such freedom in their beaches after seeing the pictures of tourists in American beaches through television or internet. In other words, democracy needs to be customized based on the needs of the people of a particular country. This is true in the case of e-democracy also. Street (2012) argued for a richer approach to the issue of `electronic democracy', one in which the cultural character of technology and of political argument are more fully recognized (Street, 2012). Conclusions The role of technology in enhancing the norms of democracy cannot be neglected under any circumstances. Technology helps the two way instant communication between the government and the people which is necessary for the government to make changes in its policies in accordance with the interests of the people. In a democratic set up, people hold the ultimate power and therefore it is necessary for the governments to know the pulses of the people instantly to rule properly. At the same time, it is difficult to implement all the democratic norms followed in one country in another country because of the cultural differences between different countries. In other words, people should never argue for freedom and liberties in their country as they seen other countries through internet or television. Protection of local culture is an important duty of the governments. Governments which turn to e-democracy should make sure that the local culture is protected properly. References Chen, P., Gibson, R. & Geiselhart, K. (N.d). Electronic Democracy? The Impact of New Communications Technologies on Australian Democracy. Political Science Program. School of Social Sciences. The Australian National University. Report No. 6. Retrieved from http://arts.anu.edu.au/democraticaudit/papers/focussed_audits/20060809_chen_etal_electr_dem.pdf Gronlund, A. (2001). Democracy in an IT framed industry. Communications of the ACM. Volume 44, Issue 1, p.22-26. Hilbert, M. (2009). The Maturing Concept of E-Democracy: From E-Voting and Online Consultations to Democratic Value Out of Jumbled Online Chatter. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 2009, Vol. 6 Issue 2, p87-110, London, S. (2012). Electronic Democracy. Retrieved from http://www.scottlondon.com/reports/ed.html Live Web cast of Chief Minister’s office (2011). Retrieved from http://www.keralacm.gov.in/index.php/component/content/article/34-frontslider/129-live-web-cast-of-chief-ministers-office Street, J. (2012). Remote Control? Politics, Technology and `Electronic Democracy'. Retrieved from http://ejc.sagepub.com/content/12/1/27.abstract Spirakis, G., Spiraki, C. & Nikolopoulos, K. (2010). The impact of electronic government on democracy: e-democracy through e-participation. Electronic Government: An International Journal, 2010, Vol. 7 Issue 1, p75-88, Watson, R.T. and Mundy, B.(2001). A strategic perspective of electronic democracy. Communications of the ACM. Volume 44, Issue 1, p.27-30. Read More