[Part
two] [Part
Three][Part
Four][Part
Five]
CONLUSION*: My biggest problem with politics today is just how
bloated the monetary figures have become. No candidate can get the word out
without the G's. This gives a lot more power to people/organizations that
really shouldn't have such direct political sway.
Indeed, this probably isn't anything new. If anything, money has less sway
than it may have once had, when only rich, white men could become
politicians. Yet, now more than ever, BIG money is finding its way into the
halls of Congress and the White House. Private contractors (aside from
operating outside of normal military protocol) are charging millions just to
transport ONE empty
truck** from one place to another in Iraq. Throwbacks are rampant. Bridges
to nowhere have somehow acquired funding. Internet companies are somehow
given the right to stratify
the internet (i.e. the system of "tubes" that provides many of
us with our mental sustenance).
And so on.
The more media that's bought up by GE, TimeWarner, etc., the less we can
count on them to provide the real biting criticism necessary to maintain a
law-abiding populace. More people are turning to the internet to get the
stories that aren't covered in the mainstream media.
That's what's inherently different, now, I'm hoping. The internet is
providing a free vehicle to those who don't have the bucks and street-cred
that, say, Hillary does. This gives us, the voters, more power, and more
sway.
For those wondering what this has to do with Taiwan, well, doesn't a US
presidential election have a lot to do with Taiwan?
Intro:
The event [that "dethroned Latin as the lingua franca of Western Christendom"] was the rise of a mass market in printed books. Like the information revolution reorganising the world in our own time, it was in essence the economic effect of the spread of a new technology. Johannes Gutenberg published his edition of the Bible in Mainz in 1450. Very soon, publishing houses sprang up all over Europe, and by 1475 most of the classic works in Latin were available in print. By 1500, 20 million printed volumes had been produced, estimated to correspond to one book for every five people in western Europe.
One of my favorite subjects is the relationship between new modes of communication, the transmission of ideas, and the result it has on society. In college, I took an English class that looked at globalization in the 18th century. An English class on globalization? Yup.
To this day, it is probably the most fulfilling course I've yet to take. We read everything from Defoe's Robinson Crusoe to Sen's Development as Freedom. One of the things that really grabbed my attention was the relationship between people's access to written materials and the resulting diffusion of power that gradually eroded authoritarian regimes.
Sure, a lot of people have said this is just dream -- why, just look at North Korea, in a region that had printing presses about four or five hundred years before any European country.*** I never said this process was finished. We are still in the process of globalizing, we are not globalized. Information can still be repressed, but I doubt many people would say that it's quite as easy as it was even ten years ago.
The quote above from Nicholas Ostler fascinating book Empires of the Word (not W-o-r-d, no l) goes on to explain how the Reformation followed quickly on the heels of the increased literacy and availability of books brought about by printing presses installed all over Europe. Almost as quickly, those in power saw that this wasn't very good for them:
The tide of new, unfiltered, information was too much for some. In France in 1535, King François I -- briefly, and without effect -- declared the printing of any books at all a capital offence. The Vatican, more circumspectly, set up the Index Librorum Prohibitorum, first named in 1559. But the flow was not stemmed. The important effect was that the channels of long-distance and high-level discourse were switching from oral diffusion at court and university, mediated through manuscript messages, to written distribution of mass-produced texts. Latin had retained its domination as the vehicle of the old-style communications, but under the weight of sheer volume it now yielded to the new.***There is a huge demand for knowledge. While it can be manipulated ("Everything you read that doesn't come from me is a dirty lie"), it's not easy to cut off.
Look at Taiwan, at the height of White Terror, with the amount of information flowing in and out increasing -- often with the help of Presbyterian missionaries coming and going -- civil unrest fermented within, and international scrutiny increased from without. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) was forced to acquiesce (however reluctant they may have been).
Today, the flow of information is constant, as it requires nothing more than an internet connection (and some extra jerry-rigging if you happen to be in China, Zimbabwe, Myanmar, etc.). And while it may be true that most of the world still doesn't have access to the internet, the number is growing rapidly. Just as they did centuries ago.
This isn't only a challenge to oppressive, authoritarian governments. I'm starting to think/hope that in the 2008 the United States might see the first truly grassroots presidential front-runner. This is no small change when you consider that the American political landscape has become a wasteland, a playground for a group of self-aggrandizing, attention-deprived ten-year-olds stuck middle-aged men and women's bodies in crisp suits and shiny American flag pins. While I don't think that anyone is all bad, I feel that there are only few who are mostly good (Waxman, for instance).
Keeping up with American politics, by and large, though, makes me feel dirty. I'm disgusted by both sides. To be clear, for those curious of my bias, I'm only old enough to have voted twice, I've voted once for each party***** and neither time was I voting for someone actually liked. I believe the government has responsibilities, but they have nothing to do with legislating what God may or may not want any of us to do (an issue that is not only begs the question: "If you make me do something, will it get me into heaven?" but also "Do you really believe what you're selling?"). Throughout the course of the most recent campaigns, I've vacillated between Obama, McCain, Hagel, and, now, Ron Paul.
NOTES:
* Since I'm prone to (pertinent) digressions, I'll presented the conclusion to each section first.
** While I highly recommend watching the whole documentary, if you don't want to, you can start at about 57 minutes (more specifically 0:58:40 to 1:02:00).
***Isn't it interesting how we in the states are always taught that ole' Gutenberg's printing press was the first.
**** Essentially the "vernacular" languages that would become French, Spanish, English, etc.
***** Though voting Democrat in South Carolina is like -- as the Chinese so wisely put it -- "pulling your pants down to fart." It serves no purpose.