I am so intrigued by Rushkoff because he is very consistent in application of his ideas. I find the following paradox puzzling:
- The Net was supposed to be post-geographical, instead there is this perception of the cultural command and control center in the Bay Area.
- The Net was supposed to allow bottom up wealth, instead the wealth is highly concentrated with tiny group of people at the top of the scalable pyramid, reaping all the financial benefits.
- The Net was supposed to be a cross denominational, universal in language, etc. Instead the Net fragmented into tiny niches that don’t talk to each other.
What is very clear for me that we still going through revolutionary destruction brought about by the Internet. It is also clear that the credit and real estate crisis is just a side show of the grandiose cultural shift. It is also rather obvious that the net sill had not impacted society as a creative and constructive force. Yes the internet already reformed our visual culture and the narrative. It remains to be seen how it will evolve into a sustainable force that can give people meaning and livelihood.
Rushkoff in Fast Company – How the Tech Boom Terminated California’s Economy:
“This was the real dream, after all. Not simply to pass messages back and forth, but to dis-intermediate our exchanges. To cut out the middleman, and let people engage and transact directly.
This is, quite simply, cheaper to do. There’s less money in it. Not necessarily less money for us, the people doing the exchanging, but less money for the institutions that have traditionally extracted value from our activity. If I can create an application or even a Web site like this one without borrowing a ton of cash from the bank, then I am also undermining America’s biggest industry–finance.”
Further Reading:
Rushkoff says Movements are Kaput
Douglas Rushkoff on Corporate History since Renaissance
Reality Sandwich Interviews Douglas Rushkoff
