1) A response to my blog report on the rhetoric of democracy. The position that was taken on this issue was that voters become disenchanted with the government in this case democracy because of its rhetoric or how it portrays itself to get ahead in the political arena. And while the rhetoric may have a polarizing effect on voters so that they no longer pay attention to ads and the speeches of politicians, it does not fully disenchant the populous from political life—politicians do that all on their own. Since America began politicians have formed themselves into groups whether it’s the Whigs, the Republicans, the Democrats etc… and they have each had a party platform , which they spoke from. Never did this result in low voter turnout or the complete disconcern with the way the country is run. It isn’t the nature of democracy where one advertises themselves under one party that creates disenchantment. The politicians, who are funded by shady companies on both sides of the aisle, the backtracking on campaign promises, and the inability to inspire any sort of action. The political individuals are what ruin participation in democracy not the rhetoric of democracy, which Borgmann talked about. What these individuals lack is not an absence of this rhetoric but charisma. In the response, charisma was said to be a part of the rhetoric of democracy. However, charisma is what gets agendas accomplished because men like Gandhi were able to get their purposes accomplished, which is more than many can say for their governments. Of course there are downsides to charisma men like Hitler had charisma and accomplished horrible offenses against humanity but he did accomplishes his agenda even though it was terrible. These are very common examples but they get the point across that the rhetoric of democracy does not completely disenchant voters it is the lack of leadership and trustworthy people that does that.
2) A response to a blog report on elibrary. The response theorized that libraries were being gradually replaced by online databases like elibrary and ebscohost. That is perfectly reasonable. However, the second part of the response said that the existence of the library would not completely disappear because of those, who loved books and those, who needed books for their job. This at best unpredictable and at worst libraries will be replaced by such engines as elibrary. The fact that people who love books will rally around them and keep them safe from the evil computer monster is ridiculous. People change. Perhaps some just liked books for their texture that is a rather weak tie to books, others liked books because they could see what others have written in the margins (that’s me, a serial margin writer) there’s always the tablet laptop that allows one to write just as they would in a book, and then there are those who feel that a book is a connection to the past but that is a value passed down by parents, which can be wiped away in a few generations. All of these rather Romantic notions of the book or the humanity infused within them is lost when man merges with technology (I will not fool myself any longer into believing that my beloved books will be around or valued for much longer…tear…). Professions are becoming increasingly reliant upon technology so books will easily dissolve from the picture. But that is the nature of the device paradigm to hide the true meaning of a book—a collection human knowledge (no matter how terrible) and a demonstration of the skill of the writer—behind an ease to the job of learning without skill. Without a belief that skill is involved in the educational system as well as the professional world, the book will no longer be around no matter how Romantic someone wants to get about it. (looking at the post the purple color makes the blog look so menacing...kind of like a grape or an eggplant...very menacing projectiles indeed)
No comments:
Post a Comment