Sergio Amadeu da Silveira - Cidadania e Redes Digitais

eng
c i t i z e n s h i p a n d d i g i t a l n e t w o r k s
network are different and occur at different speeds (SANTOS, 2002). One cannot
work only on the proposition of direct participation through voting, for example, on
topics that are under discussion in the House of Representatives; this would mean
reducing political and democratic participation to voting, and this is not the point.
The utopian dream of online deliberative democracy, on the other hand, can foster
an elitist society, where minorities, even when connected, are once again harmed
(HINDMAN, 2008). In other words, the freedom of participation of the weakest in
the online world will always be limited if it is not accompanied by equality, solidarity
and security. The alleged individual freedom, as John Locke wanted, may not be a
sufficient condition to promote more fraternal and fair relations if there is not socioeconomic
equality, as Jean-Jacques Rousseau professed (COMPARATO, 2006).
Given the different conditions of participation in the network, we must envision
democratic models that value strategies that go beyond the online deliberative
act, which may be necessary and transforming, but which is also insufficient. It is
necessary to recognize and promote, with the help of ICT, different forms of political
participation, such as the involvement in trade unions or neighborhood associations,
among other formal spaces for reflection and collective decisions.
And it is possible to go beyond that. One should promote and ensure informal
communication, in a networked format or not, with semantic tactics that are motivated
by the most prosaic oral relationships, and that are multiplied by chats in
kitchens, parks, soccer fields, city bars or SMS exchanges, social networks and P2P
tools. Therefore, discussing the radical option for fostering communication in the
urban spaces means to think beyond the formal forums of political participation,
and beyond traditional content producers like media professionals, teachers, politicians,
union leaders, activists, and others. It is quite possible that most of the urban
population make politics in an informal way, which is a form of participation that
is, in general, undervalued by specialists as journalists, politicians and intellectuals.
Here, it’s worth making a highlight. It is known that the daily informal world
is underestimated and is an object of the prejudice from the myths of rational modernity.
Political participation on the Internet, for example, especially of the young
people, has been much criticized because it is not included in the formal processes
of political decision. A classic example, often repeated by critics of informal or decentralized
political participation, is the argument that the people at Davos have no
ways to negotiate with the anti-globalization movement leaders because there is not
an authorized representation of the opposition group (CLARK and THEMUDO,
164