Page 255 - Information and American Democracy Technology in the Evolution of Political Power

P2: GCV/IRP
P1: IPH/IRP/IVO
August 14, 2002
19:12
CY101-06
0 521 80067 6
CY101-Bimber
Information, Equality, and Integration
information technology. The Lao Prime Minister’s statement about the
needforstatecontrolovertheInternetrevealsthebeliefinsidethegovern-
ment that new information technology holds the potential for facilitating
new kinds of political action. In the Prime Minister’s words, state regula-
tion of the Internet was intended “to ensure peace and safety and to pro-
tect Lao culture, society, and economy from the destructive elements.” 16
One important theme in emergent scholarship on new media and
comparative political communication involves the question of whether
information technology is inherently democratizing. This is an old ques-
tion, dating back to the early development of personal computers. In the
1970s and 1980s, many pondered the conundrum that in highly democ-
ratized societies like the United States, one of the chief political concerns
ofobserversoftechnologywasthepowercomputersapparentlygavegov-
ernments to monitor the activities of citizens; at the same time, one of the
chiefconcernsofobserversinnondemocraticcountriessuchastheSoviet
Union was the power computers apparently gave individuals to dissemi-
nate information beyond government control. The Internet is giving this
question new life. A number of examples exist worldwide of how groups
with nondemocratic aims have taken advantage of the new information
environment.InAfghanistan,theTalibanandAlQaedawereenthusiastic
employers of information technology in a nation with little traditional
media infrastructure. The Internet appears to have been key in the ability
of leaders to communicate readily with one another and to disseminate
messages outside Afghanistan to supporters worldwide. Far-right groups
in Europe, especially German neo-Nazis, have also been energetic users
of information technology for internal communication and for dissemi-
nating information externally. As Peter Chroust argues, both the Taliban
and neo-Nazis have used inexpensive information infrastructure to build
network-based organizations in the face of substantial structural, legal,
and financial obstacles to the formation of traditional, bureaucratic or-
ganizations. 17 The general principle in these examples is Tocqueville’s
and not Madison’s: Richer information environments facilitate collective
action by all sorts of groups, whether democratic or nondemocratic in
their aims.

16
Cited in Paula Uimonen, “Connecting Laos: Notes from the Peripheries of
Cyberspace,” paper presented at the INET Conference, San Jose, June 22–25, 1999,
http://www.isoc.org/isoc/conferences/inet/99/proceedings/3a/3a 2.htm.
17
Peter Chroust, “Neo Nazis and Taliban On-Line: Anti-Modern Political Movements
and Modern Media,” in Ferdinand, ed., The Internet, Democracy, and Democratization,
pp. 102–118.

238