democracy   24693

« earlier    

What Happens When Techno-Utopians Actually Run a Country | WIRED
"Rather than offer an ideology or platform, Five Star offered a wholesale rebuke of the country’s entrenched, highly paid, careerist political class—left, right, and center. And it married that disdain to a grand techno-utopian project: Through an online voting and debate portal, Five Star was building a direct democracy on the internet. The long-term goal was to replace Parliament altogether—to automate it out of existence." - Hi, I'm 40 this year and I have a sinking feeling about how this article ends
government  democracy  directdemocracy  technocracy  utopianism  italy  wired 
13 minutes ago by danhon
Facebook labelled 'digital gangsters' by report on fake news | Technology | The Guardian
Labour moved quickly to endorse the committee’s findings, with the party’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, announcing: “Labour agrees with the committee’s ultimate conclusion – the era of self-regulation for tech companies must end immediately.

“We need new independent regulation with a tough powers and sanctions regime to curb the worst excesses of surveillance capitalism and the forces trying to use technology to subvert our democracy.”
facebook  privacy  democracy  surveillancecapitalism  tomwatson  labour  parliamentary  uk  report  indie  radar 
13 hours ago by laurakalbag
Disinformation and ‘fake news’: Final Report published - News from Parliament - UK Parliament
Calls for:
- Compulsory Code of Ethics for tech companies overseen by independent regulator
- Regulator given powers to launch legal action against companies breaching code
- Government to reform current electoral communications laws and rules on overseas involvement in UK elections
- Social media companies obliged to take down known sources of harmful content, including proven sources of disinformation
ethics  facebook  socialmedia  disinformation  publishing  technology  parliament  DCMS  democracy 
13 hours ago by corrickwales
What Happens When Techno-Utopians Actually Run a Country | WIRED
Last September, Stephen K. Bannon, former chief strategist to Donald Trump and would-be pied piper to Europe’s ethno-nationalists, visited Rome to celebrate the alliance. Of all the countries he had visited in his recent travels, he singled out Italy as “the center of the political universe.” The new government there was a Bannonite dream come true: a left-right, antiestablishment coalition. “A populist party with nationalist tendencies like the Five Stars, and a nationalist party with populist tendencies like the League,” he enthused to Politico’s European edition. “It’s imperative that this works, because this shows a model for industrial democracies from the US to Asia.”
democracy  politics  anarchy  technology  utopia  populism 
2 days ago by craniac
Expertise et démocratie. Faire avec la défiance | France Stratégie
Pour éviter qu’elle ne fragilise l’action publique, il faut apprendre à « faire avec » la défiance. Il s’agit de rendre l’expertise plus lisible et...
democracy  repo 
3 days ago by gui11aume
Losing our democracy is a small price to pay for other things some people like - The Washington Post
The Republican Party doesn’t seem at all interested in actual democracy either. Exhibit A is, and likely will endure for some time, Merrick Garland. Controlling the Supreme Court at any cost was more important than a democratically elected president following constitutional order to name a justice to fill a vacancy. 
democracy  toles 
3 days ago by dpb
A billion-dollar empire made of mobile homes - The Washington Post
--Interesting though not surprising reappearance of feudal structures.
Are there economic and political theories answering the *how* and *why* questions?
privatization  capitalism  market_failures  economic_geography  inequality  institutions  democracy  WaPo 
3 days ago by rvenkat
Uninformed - Hardcover - Arthur Lupia - Oxford University Press
"Research polls, media interviews, and everyday conversations reveal an unsettling truth: citizens, while well-meaning and even passionate about current affairs, appear to know very little about politics. Hundreds of surveys document vast numbers of citizens answering even basic questions about government incorrectly. Given this unfortunate state of affairs, it is not surprising that more knowledgeable people often deride the public for its ignorance. Some experts even think that less informed citizens should stay out of politics altogether.
"As Arthur Lupia shows in Uninformed, this is not constructive. At root, critics of public ignorance fundamentally misunderstand the problem. Many experts believe that simply providing people with more facts will make them more competent voters. However, these experts fail to understand how most people learn, and hence don't really know what types of information are even relevant to voters. Feeding them information they don't find relevant does not address the problem. In other words, before educating the public, we need to educate the educators.
"Lupia offers not just a critique, though; he also has solutions. Drawing from a variety of areas of research on topics like attention span and political psychology, he shows how we can actually increase issue competence among voters in areas ranging from gun regulation to climate change. To attack the problem, he develops an arsenal of techniques to effectively convey to people information they actually care about.
"Citizens sometimes lack the knowledge that they need to make competent political choices, and it is undeniable that greater knowledge can improve decision making. But we need to understand that voters either don't care about or pay attention to much of the information that experts think is important. Uninformed provides the keys to improving political knowledge and civic competence: understanding what information is important to and knowing how to best convey it to them."

--- Huh, why didn't I know about this?
to:NB  books:noted  democracy  public_opinion  collective_cognition  re:democratic_cognition  via:rvenkat  lupia.arthur 
4 days ago by cshalizi
Uninformed - Hardcover - Arthur Lupia - Oxford University Press
Research polls, media interviews, and everyday conversations reveal an unsettling truth: citizens, while well-meaning and even passionate about current affairs, appear to know very little about politics. Hundreds of surveys document vast numbers of citizens answering even basic questions about government incorrectly. Given this unfortunate state of affairs, it is not surprising that more knowledgeable people often deride the public for its ignorance. Some experts even think that less informed citizens should stay out of politics altogether.

As Arthur Lupia shows in Uninformed, this is not constructive. At root, critics of public ignorance fundamentally misunderstand the problem. Many experts believe that simply providing people with more facts will make them more competent voters. However, these experts fail to understand how most people learn, and hence don't really know what types of information are even relevant to voters. Feeding them information they don't find relevant does not address the problem. In other words, before educating the public, we need to educate the educators.

Lupia offers not just a critique, though; he also has solutions. Drawing from a variety of areas of research on topics like attention span and political psychology, he shows how we can actually increase issue competence among voters in areas ranging from gun regulation to climate change. To attack the problem, he develops an arsenal of techniques to effectively convey to people information they actually care about.

Citizens sometimes lack the knowledge that they need to make competent political choices, and it is undeniable that greater knowledge can improve decision making. But we need to understand that voters either don't care about or pay attention to much of the information that experts think is important. Uninformed provides the keys to improving political knowledge and civic competence: understanding what information is important to and knowing how to best convey it to them.

-- based on the description, the overly optimistic conclusion that one could engineer interventions to improve *decision making* is a bit too much for me. *Some* political scientists seem to consider the author's work important. Also, his enthusiasm for open science based research is much appreciated. But I am literally judging his book by the cover!
book  political_science  political_psychology  collective_action  intervention  public_sphere  democracy 
4 days ago by rvenkat

« earlier