Vviewpoints
I
M
A
G
E
B
A
S
E
D
O
N
P
A
I
N
T
I
N
G
B
Y
J
E
A
N
-
J
A
C
Q
U
E
S
-
F
R
A
N
Ç
O
I
S
L
E
B
A
R
B
I
E
R
,
1
7
8
9
(
P
U
B
L
I
C
D
O
M
A
I
N
)
Point/Counterpoint
Democracy
and E-Democracy
A discussion of the possibility of supplanting traditional
representative democracy with e-democracy.
E-democracy has at least two meanings: Using the Internet to strengthen
real-world democracies, 1, 14 and democratic conduct of virtual Internet communities. 3 When viewed as objectives
they coalesce, as one entails or requires
the other.
Amalgamating “Internet” and “
Democracy” presupposes universal Internet access as well as Net neutrality and
freedom; their absence undermines
the legitimacy of e-democracy, as a
regime can exclude an oppressed minority, or a service provider can make
e-democracy a super-premium service,
excluding the poor.
Even if the Internet infrastructure is
universally accessible, neutral, and fair,
utilizing an existing Internet application such as Facebook and its siblings
DOI: 10.1145/3213766
Point: Foundations of E-Democracy
Considering the possibility of
achieving an e-democracy based
on long-established foundations
that strengthen both real-world democracies and virtual
Internet communities.
Ehud Shapiro
THE INTERNET REVOLUTION of democracy, which will trans- form earthly representative democracies by employing the communication and collaboration capabilities of the Internet,
has yet to come. For this
Communications Point/Counterpoint discussion,
I enlist the wisdom of our forefathers
to lead the way. By consulting the 1789
Declaration of the Rights of Man and of
the Citizen, 4 I distill core values of democracy and derive from them requirements for the foundations of e-democracy. Building on these foundations can
usher in the urgently needed revolution
of democracy.
Representative democracy is in retreat worldwide, 1, 5, 6 as many democracies transform into oligarchies,
plutocracies, or even kleptocracies.
A key reason is lack of respect of de-
mocracy’s basic tenet—equality of
rights—as the rich, the powerful, and
the connected increasingly dominate
who gets nominated, who gets elect-
ed, and what the elected do. The fore-
fathers of democracy have identified
this to be “... the sole cause of public
calamities and of the corruption of
governments.” 4
The Internet, on the other hand, is
revolutionizing industry after industry,
leaving older ways of human conduct
in the dustbin of history. Yet, it has not
changed the basic workings of democracy: Representative democracy today
functions essentially as it did 200 years
ago (Internet-enabled disruptions of
elections notwithstanding).
How could this be? Why has an Internet revolution of democracy not yet occurred, despite the pressing need for it
and the apparent clear ability of the Internet to deliver it? I believe a key reason
is that amalgamating “Internet” and
“Democracy” into an Internet democracy, or e-democracy, is more difficult
than it seems.
DOI: 10.1145/3213766; 10.1145/3231050
