Platforms and values

Evgeny Morozov, an expert on the real-world use of the internet who focuses on its dark side, has argued that the spread of technology does not also imply the spread values.

He noted that in countries such as Russia, China and Iran it can equally well be used for pushing propaganda messages, and empowers not just democrats but also fanatics, nationalists and other extremist groups.

And Morozov added that dictators don't fear the internet but rather engage with the technology as they need the information it provides to run the country. And appearing to reach out to the public can also increase their legitimacy.

He also raised questions about whether the younger generation will engage in democratic activism, suggesting that entertainment is of greater interest than political activities.

"The power of the state may be shrinking but I'm not sure that replacing it with the power of radicals and nationalists is any better," he said in a lecture at the RSA.

However, the ideas set out here are not just about the spread of technology, but also about new structures of participation which bring with them new personal responsibilities that could have a larger impact.

The issues with manipulation and control would be dealt with through a highly devolved system in which citizens feel the impact of their own choices.  Mass participation of not just groups of internet users but whole populations would be far harder to manipulate, and feedback tools would expose attempts at manipulation.

If some groups wish to opt into frameworks that limit their own rights and freedoms, then they may perhaps be allowed to do so. But the role of the neutral state must be to ensure that intimidation and coercion is prevented and that all choices are exercised freely.

But Morozov is right that the data about an individual's policy preferences or comments on other frameworks could be misused by those with bad intentions.

The suggestion here, however, has been that such systems will evolve in liberal democracies where there is the freedom to create political parties and stand for election. It is unlikely to grow in places where these freedoms do not exist, and is not intended to change the rest of the world into democracies over night.

Following on from Morozov's arguments, RSA chief executive Matthew Taylor has noted that the internet "is neither neutral nor inherently liberating". "It operates in the context of existing social conventions and power structures. Its impact is real but often subtle and unexpected," he suggested.

"The web is changing culture, relationships and organisations. Its effects are real and important. Sometimes they are good and sometimes not. The exaggerated claims of those who say the internet is inherently a destroyer of organisations and hierarchies or that it is bound to lead to greater democracy and collaboration are an unhelpful distraction from the important study of the internet's real impact on real lives."

This may be to ignore the cultural impact of technology-led change. But the proposals outlined here would go beyond this to create new conventions and power structures. The internet is the platform on which this is based and the enabler which makes such changes feasible in a way they never have been in the past.

It is not, as Taylor puts, it "lazy cyber utopianism" as there is no assumption that the internet will automatically cure all societal ills. What matters is whether political structures can deliver this goal. The tools of the internet age can be used for deciding which ends are chosen and by what means they are delivered.

The argument over which are the best ends, and the best means to achieve them, would still have to take place.

And while it is possible to imagine some people opting in to a 'Taliban framework', in the longer term it seems reasonable to expect that freedom will win over more hearts and minds than repression.

Besides which, it is not the internet itself as a platform which would destroy organisations such as parties, but Long Tail effects which reveal the true extent of cultural diversity and therefore challenge the established order.  When this happens, anyone who believes in democracy or participation will need to have alternatives which continue to embody the best of these values.

Politics, democracy and governance is at root about the distribution of power. This model takes it from those who currently have it and redistributes it to the public, not just at election time but permanently.