The Dark Side of Internet Dumb-ocracy

Image via Wikipedi

The majority is never right. Never, I tell you! That's one of these lies in society that no free and intelligent man can help rebelling against. Who are the people that make up the biggest proportion of the population -- the intelligent ones or the fools?
-Henrik Ibsen, "An Enemy of the People"

The Internet, as we've heard thousands of times, is the ultimate form of democracy. It puts the common man on the same ground as the elites, and destroys the gatekeepers and roadblocks to having your voice heard. On the Internet, the opinion of Roger Ebert matters as much as the ordinary film fan with a blog. Sure, internet comments can be awful, but if we like democracy, we have to take the good with the bad.

Anyone who's been on the Internet long enough has had this point rammed down their throats. But the problem with this argument is that it blindly assumes that democracy is, in fact, the best option. In reality, we've had thousands of years of discourse to debate what's the best political system, and by no means is the approval of democracy as universal as it is in contemporary America. Whether they know it or not, Internet advocates are positing the same assumptions that have driven the Bush administration's foreign policy: that implentation of democracy in any form is the best system, that we should applaud those who see that way, and lambast those whose don't.

I'm sure that comparing the defense of the Internet to Bush will infuriate many new media evangelists. Of course, there are fundamental differences between democracy in Iraq and democracy on the Internet. In Iraq, democracy was thrust upon the country without any input from its citizens. Internet democracy, however, grew organically out of its circumstances. Though somewhat similar to the theory in Iraq, the Internet probably has more in common with Athenian democracy. As much as we admire Greek intellect, however, there were major groups of society excluded from the democratic system in Athens. The same applies to the Internet. While Athenian democracy disenfranchised slaves, women, immigrants, and non-property owners, the Internet also underrepresents females (certainly Hillary supporters), as well as the elderly, ultra-poor, and computer illiterates.

The more pressing concern, however, is one of the deeper flaws of direct democracy: In a pure democratic system, the majority of opinion can be easily swayed by radical or dangerous thinkers with hidden agendas. The internet masses can be just as easily swayed, just as violent and—paradoxically—more resistant to new ideas. The fury directed by Ron Paul supporters at Paul's opponents on the Internet was the same fury that killed Socrates and the Salem witch trial victims. The founding fathers knew about this danger, which is why them aimed to set up a republic where the people were represented by elites rather than by a direct democracy. They recognized the inevitability of the stronger-willed people ruling with brutal power (they had just overthrown a king), so they set up a system of checks and balances to prevent a stronger power from dominating the political system entirely.

A direct democracy, conversely, has no checks and balances, and leads to stronger personalities dominating and manipulating a government while claiming to be the voice of the people. The most extreme example, Godwin's Law (or Reductio Ad Hitlerum) be damned, is the rise to power of Hitler out of the democratic government of Weimar Germany. He saw a crumbling economic system and took advantage of people's fears and weaknesses. He did this while still claiming to be a populist and maintain democracy. If you were a blond-haired, blue-eyed German, your life improved immediately after Hitler rose to power. I don't think I need to explain what happened next.

More recently, you can look to the Bush-Rove machine exploiting the rural and Southern regions of the country's hatred of elites in townhouses in the Northeast. They have focused on big government taking your tax money, while still spending exorbitantly and experiencing massive corruption. They got a pass for that by exploiting the weakness of a political system that has grown extremely more democratic since the founding fathers defined the system of government. Needless to say, no one's happy about that now.

The Internet, meanwhile, use a similar tone of being the voice of the people. Little do they know that they are still being dominated by a handful of people. The longtail theory has been debunked again and again and again. Does that mean Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg are evil dictators? Maybe not, but what would you say if I had replaced Jobs and Zuckerberg with Bill Gates and Rupert Murdoch?

This is not to say that the Internet is doomed to fascism, nor that Internet democracy is inherently a bad thing. What I am saying is that before you go extolling the wonders of the democratic values of the Internet, recognize that there are major flaws to Internet democracy and any democracy, some of which can be really dangerous. The Internet is exceedingly easy to manipulate. That may even been the Internet's greatest strength. But it's also the Internet's greatest liability.

Theater Review (NYC): As We Speak by John Patrick Bray

(This review was originally published on Blogcritics).

If there’s any reason to see As We Speak, an otherwise unbearable new play by John Patrick Bray, it’s to see how theater is slowly beginning to adapt to the Web 2.0 era. It seems virtually impossible to dramatize a generation who grasps their laptops like respirators, but as liberal grad student Noreen, Alyson Brock assumes a pose in the first act that people of my generation are all familiar with: hunched over a tiny screen, unable to turn away, willingly ignoring one’s surroundings, and unable to function in the world off the web. Minor technical difficulties aside, director Tom Berger and projection designer David Bengali succeed in maintaining an effective staging of this otherwise dull act, and sound designer Henry Akona keeps attention constantly tuned in.

There’s little else to redeem As We Speak, a play with a script, performances, and ambition that all reek of amateurism. The script itself has very little if anything to bring to the table. Though the director’s note speaks of multiple edits, somehow lines like “Go to Hawaii, wherever you can drive to” evaded the red pen. Attempts at humor unfailingly miss their target, and the balance between realism and fantasy, both in actions and realistic human emotions, never comes close to harmony.

The basic weaknesses of the script speak to nothing of the problems of the play’s premise. As We Speak is a present-day adaptation of the Sinclair Lewis novel It Can’t Happen Here, which imagined a dystopian fascist America. The novel was written in 1935, a time when major world democracies were falling into totalitarianism with terrifying frequency. It seemed that the fundamental viability of democracy was breaking down, a concept that was also addressed by Brave New World, 1984, and even Mr. Smith Goes to Washington.

Yet, after fascism was defeated in World War II, all future attempts to revive Lewis’ novel seemed spurious. The idea of a totalitarian America was intellectually alluring, but subsequent adaptations usually had to resort to science fiction or alternate histories to make the scenario remotely plausible. Most successful attempts, such as Philip Roth’s The Plot Against America, attained believability by reversing the results of World War II.

Bray, however, tries to update the premise to Dick Cheney’s America, post-9/11 and post-Katrina. Bray could be forgiven for the bad timing of the play, coming after an election that trounced fear-based conservative politics, had he dealt with those fears in any sort of interesting way. But Bray treats a fascist American uprising as a narrative inevitability that ultimately make the play simply boring. At the production I saw, not a single audience member clapped at intermission. I can assure you that was not due to awe.

Given little to work with, the cast can be forgiven for its uninspired performances. As Noreen’s Minutemen ex-husband Chad, Michael Littner doesn’t convince at all in portraying his conflicted loyalties. This results from his absurd characterization by Bray as well as the actor’s own lack of effort. The Greek Chorus of journalists is farcical, but not in a funny way, and tough guy Case Aiken isn’t all that tough. What none of the actors can be forgiven for is their lack of ability to project. It’s a small theater, but even so I could barely hear them half the time.

How much you’re willing to tolerate As We Speak depends on how willing you are to believe the title of the Sinclair Lewis book the play is based on. There are certainly some who believe America can devolve into fascism, and some may even believe it already has with the Bush presidency. For sure, there are also fascist parallels to be found in the Minutemen and Patriot Act. But the play’s 2005 perspective clearly reduces its impact. De Toqueville’s notion of a self-correcting democracy has proven to be stronger than even most liberals thought possible. Whether or not you believe America could ever fall into full-fledged totalitarianism and martial law—despite what some may think, the Bush presidency ain’t Nazi Germany—it’s hard to deny that there are institutions in place and core ideals preventing that from occurring. If there weren’t, we’d currently be talking about a Brownback presidency.

---

As We Speak by John Patrick Bray. Directed by Tom Berger; Costume Design by Erin Smiley; Projections Design by David Bengali; Set Design by Jack Blacketer; Lighting Design by Tim Kaufman; Sound Design by Henry Akona; Fight Choreography by Kathryn Lawson. Photos by Leigh Celentano.

Starring Alisyn Brock (Noreen), Anthony Rand (Travis), Michael Littner (Chad), Michelle Rabbani (Jennifer), Michael Bertolini (Harrison), Rajesh Bose (Stanz), Cary Hite (Man 1, Nov. 8-9), Kyle-Steven Porter (Man 1, Nov. 7, 10-23), Case Aiken (Man 2), Kathryn Lawson (Woman 1), and Sarah Engelke (Woman 2).

As We Speak runs through November 23 at the 14th Street Y Theatre (344 E. 14th St.). Tickets are available at www.smarttix.com or by calling 212-868-4444.