Just something to ponder...
How has the modern world changed our concept of what is a state. For many years the standard was UN recognition. Now that may be changing. As power shifts towards non-governmental organizations based around the world, like Google, is the authority of intergovernmental organizations (like the UN) becoming moot? Although I wouldn't go as far as that, the world certainly is changing, with instant change the norm. South Sudan (which separated from Sudan in July) wasn't on Google Maps until September - was Google influencing their statehood in the eyes of the world. Although they had established a government, signed border treaties with Sudan, and received UN recognition, the government of South Sudan was up in arms about the Google Maps issue (see: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-15023217), petitioning the corporation via the internet. Shortly after, Google did add the new nation to its world map. Whether that was a result of the petition is unclear.
However, this illustrates perfectly how technology can influence the way people worldwide view government. It's becoming less about Parliament, Congress, etc. and shifting focus towards actors in the international system that aren't even officially involved in government. This may be because it is much easier for people to engage directly with these organizations than for them to interact with the government, particularly in non-democratic states. The UN isn't something we deal with in our daily lives. Without media, we wouldn't have even known that South Sudan had broken away from Sudan. Maybe we learn about it from a newspaper, an internet article, or even a facebook post - but as only small pieces of a much larger international puzzle we don't receive direct communication on every decision made by international organizations like the UN since they typically don't even affect our day-to-day lifestyle.
Although South Sudan becoming an independent nation does not directly affect the all-important ME, it certainly does impact the people of South Sudan. The journalist who started the petition on change.org to add South Sudan to internet mapping services was able to gain over 1,500 supporters in only a short matter of time. This is a new sort of interaction with government that hasn't happened that much in the past. To petition corporations via the internet is certainly an interesting development in how individuals can hope to achieve change and it's something to think about. In a way, South Sudan's sovereignty and statehood were challenged by its absence from online maps. The "if it's not on the internet, it isn't true" mentality that pervades our culture has had an influence worldwide. By adding South Sudan to Google Maps, it reaffirmed the fact that it is its own independent nation rather than just part of Sudan. I'm interested in seeing if this trend continues in the future as more states are recognized. With they see a lack of an immediate response to their recognition as a threat to their sovereignty as well?
I completely agree with your point of view. The internet has really changed the way people interact with government and I guess time will tell if this is good or bad. To me it seems more bad than good. Bad because it hinders people's desire to go out and physically make a change - like participate in a protest or create a petition using pencil and paper. Another reason I find this development negative is because it forces people to rely too much on internet sources and to believe everything they see online.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion this new interaction with government can also be a positive change because it gives people an opportunity to, in their busy lives, take 1 minute and easily sign a petition online. In the long run this will make government participation higher, which ultimately helps OR can hurt our national and world-wide governments' ability to make a difference.
The internet did change a lot of how we see nations. Especially since we can interact with on any one of the continents at any given time we can see the points of view of different areas, so then we stop aligning ourselves with a nation or an area of land, but with our ideologies. It also as Emma said gives us the opportunity to show how we feel on certain issues since Americans are famous for "forgetting" to go out and vote.
ReplyDeleteI agree with everyone here because people are relying on technology more and more everyday (in the US we would all crumble without it). In the future it will only become more prominent, and it's up to the people to determine if they're going to let it control their lives and government choices. We can't undo what massive impact the internet has put on our lives, and although it helps people to easily participate and 'stay in the loop' of their government, it seems to be giving the governments less power and control to fix problems.
ReplyDeleteOmg, I totally agree with all of you! (And the fact that I used OMG, just...oh, the irony)
ReplyDeleteI think it's so crazy that signing a petition has become as easy as clicking a button-- the same action required for liking a Facebook page for Eminem or Texas Hold'em Poker.
The internet seems to be disconnecting us as well as diffusing responsibility. I'm terrible at explaining, but bear with me. What I'm getting at is that people feel like they can say anything or do anything over the internet, because the internet gets rid of manners and inhibitions. Because it's not face to face tension, people may make more rash decisions and say more radical things and then feel like they don't have to apologize when what they said becomes a problem.
Additionally, off of what Emma said about believing everything you see online, when did this become a trend???? I know I do it all the time (Example: "wait, what is blahblahblah?" "oh, i don't know, let me google it. OH, blahblahblah is akdlfjioaerij, DUH), but how did we become so ready to accept what we see on the internet?
Does anyone remember dial-up?
Dictionaries?
Encyclopedias?
Pagers?
Typewriters?
The Amanda Show?
I feel old.