Permanent Address:
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/2012/10/08/comrades-join-the-peer-progressive-movement/
Comrades, Join the “Peer Progressive” Movement!
By John Horgan | October 8, 2012
Fed up with Obomney? Sick of both Democrats and Republicans? Do you see
the parties’ similarities—their cowardly hawkishness and craven
obeisance to deep-pocketed donors–as more significant than their
differences? Looking for a fresh new approach to governance and social
problem-solving? Then you might consider becoming a “peer progressive.”
Peer progressives believe that “peer networks,” consisting of many
people of roughly equal status freely swapping ideas and information,
can accomplish things that top-down, centralized, hierarchical
organizations can’t. Peer progressives “believe in social progress, and
we believe the most powerful tool to advance the cause of progress is
the peer network.”
That quote comes from the new book by science writer Steven Johnson:
Future Perfect: The Case for Progress in a Networked Age (Riverhead
Books), which I just reviewed for The Wall Street Journal. Future
Perfect is a manifesto both for optimism—which has become my favorite
ism—and for the peer progressive movement. Peer progressives resist left
wing faith in Big Government and right wing faith in Big Business. They
believe in the wisdom of crowds, especially crowds exchanging diverse
viewpoints.
Johnson cites research suggesting that a large, diverse group often
comes up with better solutions to problems than a smaller, homogeneous
group with a higher average IQ, a phenomenon summarized as “diversity
trumps ability.” Johnson elaborates: “When groups are exposed to a more
diverse range of perspectives, when their values are forced to confront
different viewpoints, they are more likely to approach the world in a
more nuanced way, and avoid falling prey to crude extremism.”
Diversity, Johnson elaborates, “does not just expand the common ground
of consensus. It also increases the larger group’s ability to solve
problems.” Peer progressives favor diversity not just for traditional
liberal reasons, to counter sexism, racism and other prejudices, but
because “we are smarter as a society—more innovative and flexible in our
thinking—when diverse perspectives collaborate.”
Peer networks predate the Internet; Johnson sees them at work in the
Renaissance, the Scientific Revolution and other periods of
extraordinary creativity. But the Internet and other digital
technologies–which reduce the costs, time and effort of
communication–have turned out to be astonishingly effective enablers of
peer networks. Hence we get Internet-catalyzed marvels ranging from
Wikipedia and Kick Starter to the Arab Spring and Occupy Wall Street
movements.
Johnson is especially hopeful that peer networks can revitalize—even
revolutionize—politics. He suggests how peer networks might thwart
attempts by the rich and powerful to hijack U.S. democracy. We might
move closer to “direct democracy,” in which we vote for laws and
policies rather than for politicians who are supposed to represent our
interests but too often don’t.
Political peer networks are springing up all over the world. Take for
example the Israeli-Palestinian Confederation, which calls for
incorporating Israel and Palestine into a Swiss-style confederation. The
Confederation plans to hold an online election in December to form a
virtual parliament. Saleem Ali, a professor of environmental studies at
the University of Vermont, notes in National Geographic that the
Confederation represents an attempt to “move beyond the stagnation of
one-state/two-state fixes.”
The underlying principles of peer networks have been explored by other
writers. Johnson’s evangelical anti-authoritarianism reminds me a bit of
the journalist Kevin Kelly, whose 1994 book Out of Control insisted that
because nature organizes itself without any centralized control, we
should too. But whereas Kelly came off as a bit of a crank, Johnson has
a knack for sounding reasonable.
Couple of caveats: One, Johnson neglects to address the potential of
peer networks for solving two of our biggest problems: militarism and
climate change. In my Wall Street Journal review, I urged Johnson and
other peer progressives to start thinking of ways to tackle the problems
of warfare and excessive fossil-fuel consumption.
Caveat two comes from my friend and colleague–my peer!–Andy Russell, a
historian of technology at Stevens Institute of Technology. Andy objects
to Johnson’s claim that the Internet is itself the product of a peer
network. Johnson calls Arpanet, the Pentagon-funded network that gave
rise to the Internet, a “radically decentralized system” and a “network
of peers, not a hierarchy.”
Wrong, says Andy, who has done lots of research on the development of
standards for the Internet. “The evidence is pretty clear that the
Arpanet and Internet were designed and built through a hierarchical
process,” Andy writes. “In fact its hierarchy (and well-heeled sponsor,
the Department of Defense) was the single factor most responsible for
the Internet’s success: it kept at bay the factions unleashed by
democracy in international standards committees.”
Steven Johnson no doubt welcomes this sort of criticism. This is exactly
how peer networks are supposed to work. Johnson presents his vision of
the future, Andy and I respond with our quibbles, others respond to us,
we bicker, resolve our differences, agree to disagree, reach
compromises, come up with new ideas and march bravely toward a more
prosperous, peaceful future.
About the Author: Every week, John Horgan takes a puckish, provocative
look at breaking science. A former staff writer at Scientific American,
he is the author of four books, including The End of Science (Addison
Wesley, 1996) and The End of War (McSweeney's Books, January 2012).
Follow on Twitter @Horganism.
© 2012 Scientific American, a Division of Nature America, Inc. All
Rights Reserved.
# distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
# <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
# more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: [email protected]
