James E. Porter: “Liberal Individualism and Internet Policy:
A Communitarian Critique" (13)
| "In a society or community with inherently inequal participants, or with a long history of inequality, the appeal to the liberal enlightenment view may have the effect of maintaining the status quo." (242) |
Porter’s article critiques liberal individualism ethics prominent in Internet discussions from the perspective of communitarian ethics, finding a gap between these principles and actual problems within an electronic environment.
Pointing to the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) as a powerful proponent of this point of view, Porter warns against the “absolute free speech position,” noting that organizations such as this base their definitions on a very narrow and specific discourse community. Instead of curbing ethically controversial situations, liberal individualism “ends up protecting the rights of current property owners at the expense of the community good” (234). Additionally, the “free speech position” suggests that victims of violent, invasive speech ignore the offenders, disregarding the language’s power of silencing those in traditionally marginalized positions. Making the Internet into a virtual utopian ideal is also very dangerous, hiding the power struggles and use of power that take place there.
Since no discourse occurs in a value-free, context-free environment, Porter advocates communitarian ethics as a guideline for making ethical decisions in inter-networked settings. Communitarian ethics values the community’s good over the individual’s rights in difficult, controversial situations. An individual’s responsibility to their community as well as their sense of reciprocal actions guides ethical decisions. Instead of monitoring online activities, communitarian ethics protects the interests of those using the Internet in positive ways.
|
1 2 3 4 5 6 |
7 8 9 10 11 12 |
13 14 15 16 17 18 |
19 20 21 22 23 |
Contents |
