A couple of hundreds years ago, the native Americans did not live with the concept that "land can be owned". But the settlers did, and then they came to own all the land through their own set of rules. Similar things are happening with 'information'. Some people come up with new ideas on how to possess (that is, buy and sell) them. Others who are not capable of catching up with those rules fall hopelessly behind.
In the three pro-information age readings, the premises are remarkably simple. "We have found a new way to carry on, even expand with our way of brake-less capitalism! Hurray!"(exaggeration inside). On first look it seems that they are advocating a new era that is completely different from the previous industrial age, but a careful reading reveals that they are in fact celebrating the new powerful capitalism and the social system that is built upon it. It is no wonder that Masuda's categorization uses terms such as market, product and intellectual 'industries' frequently.
Leadbeatter argues that information society will provide a solution to the problems of the market and the community at the same time, and Dyson et al. are discussing about how the institutional systems should be modified to adapt the change. Their goal is to overcome the limits of the present 'industrial' capitalistic society by changing their main products, which happen to potentially enable collective, decentralized aspects. I don't means to say that industrial capitalism is neccessarily wrong, but that the fundamental capitalistic social problems such as unquality, political brainlessness and consumerism don't simply disappear by changing the main product from this to that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment