Abstract

There is a widely held view that information and communications technology has the potential to enhance democracy by enabling all citizens to participate actively in public affairs. Many theorists suggest that the drive to maximise participation in politics could lead to totalitarianism, while a certain level of apathy can provide political stability. Democracy is a middle way between totalitarianism and anarchy and pushing it too far in any of its attributes is likely to lead to its collapse. There is a complex web of relationships between bureaucracy, government and citizens with democracy and ICT weaving through them as they each take on different roles in society. The overreach of bureaucracy is becoming a major threat to the future of democracy today. Politics is about compromise and transforming conflict into cooperation. This is best achieved through face-to-face embodied interaction rather than through virtual channels although the latter can be valuable when used to support face-to-face meetings rather than as a substitute for them. With the possible exception of electricity, no other technology has transformed our society to the extent that ICT has done. Since the technology has such a strong impact on our lives and on society generally, we should have a say in its design and distribution. Even if we refuse to actively use the technology, it nevertheless affects our social environment and it is impossible to avoid becoming passive users. The question then arises as to whether ICT is a neutral, deterministic or an autonomous technology. Some theorists have proposed ways in which people could have a democratic input to the development of technology but it is difficult to find any who have focused on the disingenuous business model which ICT industry has adopted and which leaves no room for democratic input from users.