The future of democracy
Social media, online vote and politics without politicians, is this how the future will look?
Between the 2nd and and the 3rd of June of 1946, a referendum was held in Italy to decide the future institutional form of the country: the monarchy or the republic. The latter won and so democracy. 74 years have passed since then and many changes have occurred, in fact we need to remember that democracy is not simply a political system, but also a political process. Democracy changes and adapts in response to the many challenges, problems and events that come up over time. Then, it is legitimate to ask: how will democracy look like in the future?
Social media has not only changed the way we interact with people, but also the world of politics. The most famous politicians have a Twitter and Facebook account to inform their followers and the whole population (especially now in the middle of the coronavirus crisis) with tweets or by streaming official press releases. In order to reach also the younger generation they use Instagram and some of them have a considerable following.
The means of our participation in politics have changed as well. In 2011, during the so-called Arab Spring, social media (and especially Twitter and Facebook) played a crucial role. Initially, digital platforms were used as a means of communication between the core group of activists and to gather people, mainly in Egypt. Later, they served as a way to exercise freedom of expression and political involvement. Authorities immediately pointed their finger to social media and they would see it as the principal cause of the insurrections. More detailed examinations discredited the initial assumptions and highlighted that social media actually helped spreading information outside of the country. What supports this thesis is that most Egyptians are not online, in fact just 35% of the population uses internet and 84% of them visit social networking sites to stay informed about the current political situation. Similarly in 2019, the actions of a young Swedish girl, named Greta Thunberg, would get known by the entire world and would give life to the movement Fridays For Future, which takes action and communicates mostly online.
In the last few days we have seen the dramatic video of George Floyd spreading extremely fast. As a result instagram, facebook and other platforms have re-opened the debate about racism and videos, pictures, news and many other communications are shared in the blink of an eye: the whole world is seeing everything almost in real time. However, when information is shared so quickly, it is harder to verify, creating an overflow of fake news. In addition to that, artificial intelligence allows to create so-called deep fakes. This is a technique used to make realistic human images: they have been utilised to create false videos and pictures, that can potentially propagate and they are harder and harder to spot. This might become a problem during elections, because not only false information would ruin a candidate’s reputation, but we would also be very vigilant when it comes to trusting what we see.
However, maybe we will not even need to vote as social media registers our preferences, including political ones, or maybe we will be voting online. In 2001 the Estonian e-minded coalition (it means that it was in favour of the use of internet and new technologies also for governmental purposes) gained popularity and pushed for online elections. The proposal was approved and in 2005, the first online elections were held and they were considered a success. No other country has tried this system and no one is willing to as there are a few issues. A voting system is adequate when it fulfills two main requirements: anonymity and trust. Firstly, nobody should be able to find your vote and this factor safeguard your freedom of choice and expression, but there is no electronic system that can make you totally undetectable. Second of all, trust: you should be able to handle your vote without it being changed or distorted just to pilot voting.Technological systems can be very often attacked by hackers, compromising safety. This does not mean that the classical voting system is perfect, but it has been tested for centuries and we have come up with many possible solutions to counteract many frauds, like the creation of a network of volunteers that control each other or tamper proof seal for transport.
We live in indirect democracies, this means that a person, elected by the voters can represent them in the parliament, but in a future of intelligent social media and online debates, there is no need for an intermediary. In this possible prediction, your vote will not be required and you would represent yourself directly.
In the worst case scenario, there is no future for democracy altogether. The world pandemic has promoted authoritarian regimes. The Russian government have been accused of spreading denigratory information that can potentially damage European states. Brazilian President Bolsonaro is refusing to acknowledge the seriousness of the virus and therefore to apply proper support measures. At the same time, Hungarian PM Orban has received limitless powers from the parliament as long as he pleases. Theoretically, this was done in order to act faster for the pandemic, but the first law he passed banned legal sex recognition and sex change therapy. In the meantime Trump has claimed the moon for the US with the purpose of exploring and exploiting lunar resources and the last launch of the rocket made by spaceX shows the independence of the American space agencies from Russian technology. All of this is accompanied by the arm race, that has been tackled in the previous article.
Whatever the future will be, do not take democracy for granted and be careful of the use you do of social media and of the news you find. The present democracy is not perfect for sure, but in the future the problems will be more and more complicated and it is our duty to keep it safe.
by Benedetta Stoiculiasa
