[CPSR Home Page] | [CPSR Newsletter Index] | [Fall 1997 Issue--Table of Contents ]

Development, Underdevelopment, and Communication for a Global Democracy

by Hugo Estrella, Argentina

CPSR News Volume 15, Number 4: Fall 1997

During the 1970s, after the oil crisis, when Western banks had been replenished,the preferred countries to lend money to were those in Latin America. However, the funds went to harsh dictatorships, governments willing to buy sophisticated weapons to prepare for World War III- which was "very close" according to their foreign advisors- and deeply corrupt internal organizations. The result was a lasting debt, impossible to be pay, which constituted an iron collar on the neck of the new-born democracies that suceeded the authoritarian regimes.

Multilateral organizations, such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank, only served to deepen the dire situation those democracies had to face, by mandating regressive policies. Efforts to repay the debt under these conditions made it impossible to ameliorate the lives of the majority of the people by investing in education, science and technology, and housing. Inflation resulted, and foreign aid more and more restricted to enforce the establishment of those regressive policies did the rest. Governments pursuing broad-based democracy were replaced by conservative governments that had plenty of foreign support and no fear of setting up policies of privitization, making major cuts in social expenditure, increasing regressive taxes such as the value-added tax (VAT) instead of the income tax, and consequently shifting the burden, again, to the middle and lower classes.

This time international organizations gave a strong support to those administrations, but with two serious consequences, perhaps irreparable: the disappearance of assets built with the effort of generations, and a loss of social support for democracy. Because of this economic injustice, though democracy of a sort prevails, the public views it as an extraneous, autonomous systems, one that does not invite their participation-in effect, exclusive democracy.

On the other hand, the internal logic of capitalism demands higher and higher production, especially in fields where the time to obsolescence keeps getting shorter. Incorporating technology, then, is a must for peripheral countries, although that incorporation has often proved expensive and misused.

The challenge, therefore, is to use the new to foster development that serves all the people. The information revolution has a counterpart that is potentially democratic. A new field of social activity is open, one which, like any social field, can be appropriated either to serve or to thwart democracy. Clearly, the problem one of universal access.

However, universal access is not merely a matter of wiring every neighborhood. It requires a deep involvement by the users. Democratic involvement is a two-way street. On the one hand, it takes invesment of assets and incorporation of technology. On the other, it requires a commitment by the users, who must feel that they are linked in a community that respects them, needs their expression, and keeps open the possibility of dialogue.

The Internet is an exceptionally good place for multiethnic and multicultural dialogue. It can be the basis for a global consciousness and for global action. But the "global" concept cannot be achieved if it is from the point of view of the individual's community.

We face a deep ethical challenge when considering the Net as a living library and a community as well. There has to be a place for everyone, even for those we personally do not like. The only requisite for belonging is the ability to be understood.

But the most serious challenge is how to democratize this wonderful tool. The "wired" community is deeply unequal, as are most communities. But if we are seriously thinking of the Internet as something to be deepened and extended, we must try to incorporate the individual as an inhabitant of cyberspace, and then help the inhabitant become a citizen.

Citizenship on the Internet is a concept to be discussed, and created. We are now able to develop new communities that differ from those we currently know. It is a responsibility we cannot resign. It is an opportunity for us to build something better than we have now.

Are we going to repeat the ill circle of underdevelopment, injustice and exclusion this time?

Hugo Daniel ESTRELLA Executive Director Y/S Pugwash - Argentina te.: 54 51 84 4320 E-mail: pugwash@usa.net 27 de abril 5300-Block 19 dto. 147 Quebrada de las Rosas (5000)Cordoba ARGENTINA

[Previous Article] | [Table of Contents] | [Next Article]

© Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
P.O. Box 717 Palo Alto, CA 94302-0717
Tel. (415) 322-3778 Fax (415) 322-3798 webmaster@cpsr.org