Mike G. wrote:
> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/the-mobile-revolution-and-the-rise-
> and-rise-of-possessive-individualism/
and in the referenced paper wrote:
An example, in a recent excursion here in Ghana I happened to notice
that the local artisanal in-shore fishery consists largely of boats
with up to a dozen fishermen. When it comes time to haul in the nets
up to 30 or so villagers may be involved. These folks don't need to
know as individuals what the local price of fish might be in a
particular market (they aren't selling the fish as individuals)....
....
So, in the vast majority of instances (and the design of both the
mobile systems and the individual applications almost require this)
the information is made available only on a one-to-one (individual to
individual) basis. Any follow-on as for example through the sharing of
this information with others say in the village is solely at the
discretion (and the responsibility) of the individual without there
being any formal or informal (let alone technical) structures to
support this (in fact community radio often becomes a means for
"community"integration of mobile communication but that is a subject
for another blogpost).
In a village there's no privacy. So if Cousin Alice sends word to Bob
that fish prices are better up-town than down-town, everybody in the
village knows Bob had a visitor. They probably know from whom the
message comes and what it's about. In fact, the messenger may deliver
the message in public.
So getting private info on the fish market will require deviousness
and subterfuge which will themselves be noticed by other villagers.
Now Alice calls Bob on his mobile. No one knows what he learned and
probably can't guess who the call was from.
Taking the Devil's Advocate role here, if the *possibility* of private
information leads to individuals abandoning communitarian behavior in
favor of maximizing personal gain, shouldn't we assume that "possessive
individualism" is the natural thing a la Friedman -- that communal
behavior was the result of surveillance, not of any deeply felt
commitment to community? If there were such a commitment, Bob would
immediately go tell Claire & Dennis the news and pretty soon everybody
would know.
So is the moral here that privacy enables deviance and a local but
distributed panopticon ensures conformity to community values?
Well, I haven't read Macpherson (whom you cite [1]) but perhaps I
should. I did read the cited Wikipedia page:
WikiP> For Friedman, economic freedom needed to be protected because
WikiP> it ensured political freedom.[9] Friedman appeals to historical
WikiP> examples that demonstrate where the largest amount of political
WikiP> freedom is found the economic model has been capitalist. In
WikiP> Friedman's words, "history suggests...that capitalism is a
WikiP> necessary condition for political freedom."[10] Macpherson
WikiP> counters that the 19th-century examples that Friedman uses
WikiP> actually show that political freedom came first and those who
WikiP> gained this freedom, mainly property owning elites, used this
WikiP> new political freedom for their own best interests which meant
WikiP> to open the doors to unrestrained capitalism. It follows then,
WikiP> that capitalism will only be maintained as long as those who
WikiP> have political freedom deem it worthwhile. As the 19th century
WikiP> progressed and suffrage was expanded, there were corresponding
WikiP> restraints placed upon capitalism which indicates that
WikiP> political freedom and capitalism are at odds with one
WikiP> another. "At any rate", Macpherson contends, this "historical
WikiP> correlation scarcely suggests that capitalism is a necessary
WikiP> condition for political freedom.
which makes sense to me as do the rest of the ideas attribute to
him. [2]
Is the village panopticon a necessary political constraint on
economic activity? How does it scale to modern nation states and
transnational corporations?
OTOH, how do the tangible, best-case benefits of ICT in the village
context scale to help we'uns sitting alone at our computers and
already more or less wedged in possessive-individualism mode?
- Mike
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._B._Macpherson
[2] Except for two sentences that I can't parse.
--
Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~.
/V\
[email protected] /( )\
http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ ^^-^^
_______________________________________________
Futurework mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
