Policy problems

This breaking point in the political system can also be looked at from another angle, in that existing political systems may be under threat not just from the internet, but also from an inability to meet the major policy challenges that lie ahead.

In Social Change 2.0, David Gershon argued that many of society's "operating assumptions" have proven faulty and that they now need to be completely rethought.

He argued that as environmental systems unravel and social systems deteriorate, the world is in need of rapid transformative change.

But, said Gershon, the current social change tools such as government command and control, financial incentives and citizen protest were designed for slow-moving, incremental change.

He makes the case that not only must the world be reinvented, but also the process by which this reinvention is achieved.

"According to systems theory, when the current solutions prove inadequate for the magnitude of change required, a system goes into stress and begins to break down. What is required to help the system evolve is a second-order change solution – or solution capable of transforming and reorganising it to a higher level of performance.

"Social Change 2.0 represents such a solution for our social systems. It stands on the shoulders of Social Change 1.0 because it could not function optimally without the rule of law and a democratic form of government that allows for free expression.

"But it is designed to go beyond the constraints purposefully built into this more incremental approach to social change."

Robert Phillips, in a post on consumerism and citizenship, has also highlighted the need for social change if fundamental problems are to be successfully addressed, and suggests that technology can generate the change.

"Citizen values must supplant consumer desires. Until we properly understand this, we will never be able to break through and into a low carbon economy and build a more value-rich, sustainable and wellbeing world...

"The emergence of new networks heralds not only the opportunity for citizens to cluster and campaign around specific issues of either broad or narrow interest, but also inherently demands transparency and fosters the direct accountability of business and governments to the citizens they are meant to serve." ^[i]

He argues that as citizens gain more power in a networked world, they can drive change by governments and businesses to ensure the acknowledgement and advancement of shared interests.

So the internet is set to cause ever greater problems of legitimacy for political parties on the one hand, and on the other the parties and the systems they are part of may be unable to deal with the challenges ahead.

Part II details how political structures can be reformed to deal with these twin problems, giving power to citizens in the way that both Gershon and Phillips argue is desirable.

But at this point it might also be worth noting that a new 'participation state', while not in itself solving specific policy problems, has the potential to combine the ease and simplicity of consumerism with the engagement of citizens in order to harness the best of both worlds.

[i] Phillips, R. (2009), 'Inverting the power pyramid'. Available at: http://www.citizenrenaissance.com/2009/12/04/inverting-the-power-pyramid [December 30, 2009].