For those Napsterites in the USA

[JackSpratts]

ok, so here we are three and a half years after mazer's post.

whatcha think - are netizens becoming a voting force in the us? certainly obama has fired up waves of non-voters recently, many of whom may be net users, but getting people out to the polls for a singular event does not necessarily a movement make.

i see politicians taking a bit more care before trampling technology, that the days of indiscriminately creating bills that favor old line business at the expense of online enterprise are passing, and that's good, but i'm not sure it's a reflection of the political power of net users as a block as much as it recognises the now-overwhelming movement of capital to the internet.

as the net itself becomes mainstream and more and more civilians find themselves routinely utilizing it as part of their daily lives the question becomes somewhat academic, but i nevertheless think it is relevant to those who formed the original core of modern users, and i consider everyone here in that group.

where then are we as napsterites, i.e. are we nappies who may not have previously participated politically now registered, voting and locally active, or are we about the same as before all this internet stuff took off, and more generally, have long time net users gained genuine political influence & are we using it to any meaningful effect?

- js.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by JackSpratts

ok, so here we are three and a half years after mazer's post.

whatcha think - are netizens becoming a voting force in the us? certainly obama has fired up waves of non-voters recently, many of whom may be net users, but getting people out to the polls for a singular event does not necessarily a movement make.

i see politicians taking a bit more care before trampling technology, that the days of indiscriminately creating bills that favor old line business at the expense of online enterprise are passing, and that's good, but i'm not sure it's a reflection of the political power of net users as a block as much as it recognises the now-overwhelming movement of capital to the internet.

as the net itself becomes mainstream and more and more civilians find themselves routinely utilizing it as part of their daily lives the question becomes somewhat academic, but i nevertheless think it is relevant to those who formed the original core of modern users, and i consider everyone here in that group.

where then are we as napsterites, i.e. are we nappies who may not have previously participated politically now registered, voting and locally active, or are we about the same as before all this internet stuff took off, and more generally, have long time net users gained genuine political influence & are we using it to any meaningful effect?

- js.

i think, as Americans grow up online, the net political community is getting absorbed by the country as a whole and will continue to do so. since netizens represent so many diverse political viewpoints, their impact as a voting force is diluted by their diversity.

as for myself, i was always an active voter so the net hasn't really impacted that...but i have a 17 y/o son who is far more engaged than i was at that age and is just itching to vote (tho unfortunately his 18th bday is a few days after the 2008 Prez Elections). this is a direct result of the net - not just by getting more info, but by interacting with other politically active people and stoking his interests. at his age, i could listen to the political discussion but not much more. the net allows my son to start and participate in political discussions and therefore become much more part of the process. i think this ultimately creates voters - we'll see in November.

[albed]

Does anyone really think getting more idiots to the polls will make democratic countries any better. Most of the political rallying cries amount to little more than shallow commercial slogans; "vote for change", "blah blah cheaper gasoline blah blah", etc. aimed at the large segment of low IQ voters who can't or won't put forth the effort to understand complex issues. Why the fuck do we need more of them voting?


I don't think the internet has made dumb voters any smarter; it's just given empty propaganda a wider audience and provided bandwagon appeal to get even apolitical people to support a candidate just because others are and it's the cool thing to do.


And no matter how the presidential election turns out, the vast majority of voters would have preferred someone else in that position. Think about that.

[theknife]

Originally Posted by albed

Does anyone really think getting more idiots to the polls will make democratic countries any better. Most of the political rallying cries amount to little more than shallow commercial slogans; "vote for change", "blah blah cheaper gasoline blah blah", etc. aimed at the large segment of low IQ voters who can't or won't put forth the effort to understand complex issues. Why the fuck do we need more of them voting?


I don't think the internet has made dumb voters any smarter; it's just given empty propaganda a wider audience and provided bandwagon appeal to get even apolitical people to support a candidate just because others are and it's the cool thing to do.


And no matter how the presidential election turns out, the vast majority of voters would have preferred someone else in that position. Think about that.

so only people as smart as you should be able to vote? quite the elitist, aren't we? perhaps we should just roll back the process a couple hundred years and only allow white male landowners to vote...

more information is inherently a good thing - whether people are using it well is impossible to quantify and therefore inarguable. the internet simply expands on what radio, tv, and the printing press has done before it and takes it to the next level.

furthermore, the internet decentralizes the political process in a fundamentally profound way: a candidate now has the ability to go outside of the established party structure to organize and fund-raise at an unprecedented grass-roots level. a national constituent base , a war chest, and a campaign can be created online literally in a matter of hours. in this way, the internet has weakened the top-down nature of party politics - also a good thing, imo.

[RDixon]

Behold, the internet.

My God! It's full of ads and albeds.

[albed]

Originally Posted by theknife

so only people as smart as you should be able to vote? quite the elitist, aren't we? perhaps we should just roll back the process a couple hundred years and only allow white male landowners to vote...

more information is inherently a good thing - whether people are using it well is impossible to quantify and therefore inarguable. the internet simply expands on what radio, tv, and the printing press has done before it and takes it to the next level.

furthermore, the internet decentralizes the political process in a fundamentally profound way: a candidate now has the ability to go outside of the established party structure to organize and fund-raise at an unprecedented grass-roots level. a national constituent base , a war chest, and a campaign can be created online literally in a matter of hours. in this way, the internet has weakened the top-down nature of party politics - also a good thing, imo.

A couple centuries ago "the process" allowed black male landowners to vote too, and own slaves even. You liberals just can't hide how wrong you are about even the simplest things.

More disinformation is what the internet typically brings over traditional mass media. You'll seldom find anything original on it, just multitudes of people echoing the same things like 'Obama's a muslim'.

Wtf's "profound" about a grassroots campaign. Once again you betray your ignorance of history. But at least on the internet you have lots of company.

[theknife]

i'd forgotten how simple you are:

blah blah blah blah blah liberals blah blah blah blah blah you're ignorant blah blah blah etc etc etc

repeat ad nauseum.

[albed]

Now that kind of reply suits you much better than your preprogrammed kneejerk cry of elitist/racist/sexist to respond to any points you can't understand or debate.


It shows that you really can think for yourself.