Digital Democracy

When I was in Japan, I became friends with a large group of Nepalese academics and business people (interestingly they were one-in-the-same). Among other things with them that I found interesting, their strong and specific ideas around e-governance and "Digital Democracy" were well-thought out, based on experiences they found oppressive, unjustifiable, and against the evolving way of things, based on experience with institutions they found out of step with the times, and rooted in a combination of self-interest and love of their people. At times, I must say, I really thought I was sitting with the Thomas Jeffersons and Sam Adams' of the 21st Century East. The parallels in thinking, the underpinning of it, and the characters themselves, to the US experience of the 1600/1700s was unmistakeable. Still, the one innovation that they inspired me to think about was using distribution and marketing technology (internet and IP tools), more quantity and relevance of available information (from same, and including voting records), and analytical tools, to call bullshit on bad and/or self-serving (small interest serving) policies AND the elected officials who made them. Like principles underpinning many successful e-endeavors, pulling all this information into one digestible place, creating an interface around it to make it easy to use around certain flexible, relevant search parameters, and branding it as a destination (in this case of and for a "truly informed electorate") might be a grass-roots type step that serves as a cog in the accountability & (real and useful) change machine. Step 1 is shining a real flashlight on it all. The things that I think we really need - a credible 3rd (and maybe 4th) Party system, a Parliamentary structure that builds more nuance into debate and policymaking, a revamp of the circuit system of the judiciary, etc etc - I am not sure how to get there. Or that others agree. Or that it is what we really

...