Welcome to the InfoSci Platform
Reference Hub3
Social Tyranny and Democratic Governance in the Information Age

Social Tyranny and Democratic Governance in the Information Age

Andrew Ward
Copyright: © 2014 |Volume: 5 |Issue: 2 |Pages: 21
ISSN: 1947-9131|EISSN: 1947-914X|EISBN13: 9781466654129|DOI: 10.4018/ijep.2014040103
Cite Article Cite Article

MLA

Ward, Andrew. "Social Tyranny and Democratic Governance in the Information Age." IJEP vol.5, no.2 2014: pp.32-52. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijep.2014040103

APA

Ward, A. (2014). Social Tyranny and Democratic Governance in the Information Age. International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP), 5(2), 32-52. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijep.2014040103

Chicago

Ward, Andrew. "Social Tyranny and Democratic Governance in the Information Age," International Journal of E-Politics (IJEP) 5, no.2: 32-52. http://doi.org/10.4018/ijep.2014040103

Export Reference

Mendeley
Favorite Full-Issue Download

Abstract

The development and diffusion of inexpensive, reliable and easy to use public Internet access means that large portions of the U.S. and global populations now regularly communicate with one another. Will the increasing penetration of the Internet into the social and political lives of people facilitate Thomas Jefferson's vision of a world “founded on the primacy of individual liberty and a commitment to pluralism, diversity, and Community”? While many people believe that the answer to this question is “yes”, such affirmations often rest on adducing cases not theoretically linked to one another. In contrast, the present paper provides a broadly philosophical, conceptual analysis of how use of the Internet can lead to forms of “social tyranny” in which one or more elements of a community impose their own beliefs and interests on others in that community. For instance, dependence on Internet access and use for social action or pertinent information about social activities may lead to marginalization and exclusion for people whose Internet access or use is limited. Furthermore, the connectedness or mode of connectedness of groups or organizations may give them an unfair advantage disseminating and advocating the messages they deliver to members of the communities in which they exist. The conclusion is not that we should adopt attitudes and policies that are antithetical to the use of the Internet. Rather, using ideas from Dewey and Habermas, amongst others, the conclusion is that it is important to reflect broadly and critically on how use of the Internet can transform the character of the public domain and the deliberations about governance that occur within that domain.

Request Access

You do not own this content. Please login to recommend this title to your institution's librarian or purchase it from the IGI Global bookstore.