The reflections offered by the various contributors to "Digital Delirium" help remind us of exactly what it is we should ponder before formally adopting new systems and technologies into our daily routines. The book's central theme is to approach the Digital/Information Age with an acknowledgement of potential societal consequences. Even the most optimistic supporters for global networking concede that there are certain dangers with cybertechnology that can befall disaster on the inexperienced and the ignorant. If there is one thing the Internet does not have a lot of is accountability; until global networks become self-verifying, we will have to take the information we process with a proper degree of skepticism.
While it was not hard to derive some practical knowledge and advice from the book's material, a few select authors nevertheless ventured into a realm of dialogue that seemed designed more for bewilderment and confusion than clarity and understanding. In reading some of the blueprints for futuristic societies as described by Marcos Novak, Paolo Atzori, and a host of others, I found it difficult to figure if they were being literal, speaking metaphorically, or just pulling my chain. In spite of this problem, there were three consistencies that I deciphered as fundamental beliefs that editors Arthur and Marilouise Kroker hoped to convey by virtue of the articles published in their book. First is the danger or right-wing politics and government regulation of the Internet and global communication. Second is the contradictory and thereby self-defeating intellectual arguments taken by those who fear or oppose cybertechnology. Finally, there is the sense that the new Information Age has been overrated in terms of its impact and importance, and that the authors are merely practicing cynicism as they patronizingly amuse and augment the curiosity of their brainwashed readers with the book's technoscopic subject matter.
The published writings can be taken collectively as a "manifesto in contention against right-wing politics and cyberlibertarianism" that threaten the functioning use of the Internet as a democratic tool for all individuals. Humanists like Slavoj Zizek and Robert Adrian, in conjunction with patronizing skeptics such as R.U. Sirius and Jean Baudrillard proclaim the imminent dangers to our basic freedoms if global communication is used by a group of elitists to manipulate minds and disperse propaganda to credulous and unsuspecting victims. I whole-heartedly agree on this standpoint. However, I was disheartened at the general consensus among the writers that religions, in particular Fundamental Christianity and Catholicism, are examples of these deceiving congregations that serve only to indoctrinate their followers into a state of mind incapable of independent thought. There is wonder and excitement to be had with the possibilities presented by technological breakthroughs, but there is also great sadness where secular principles such as materiality and profitability proceed to make one a godless creature; indeed, one can be too intellectual for his own good.
In presenting written arguments against the implementation of worldwide networks and open systems, Kroker cleverly reveals a contradiction that makes the dissenters' case less credible. For example, Berhnard Serexhe states in no uncertain terms that interactive communications will function as a powerful economic / marketing tool that will attempt to homogenize consumers, erase multiculturalism, and spell the end of European cultural identity. Geert Lovink and Slavoj Zizek counter this fear with the contradicting apprehension felt by right-wing nationalists who prefer homogeneity (as long as it is with their belief system) versus diversity but consider the Internet as a method of introducing foreign influences into their temporal mainstream. Which is it? Will we be subject to pan-capitalism and global marketing aspiring to create an online society with unvarying tastes and cultural preferences? Or will an autonomous Internet open the gates to individualism and encourage worldwide diversity at the expense of segregated nationalistic esteem? Perhaps there is a point to the cynical undertone evident throughout "Digital Delirium." Not only are the pessimists getting worked up over nothing, but cybertech industry proponents themselves cannot distinguish science fiction from reality in their speculative prognostications of where technological advancements will take us as a community. As manifested by the Critical Art Ensemble, too many so-called information age innovations and products serve no practical purpose, are underutilized, or are presently unavailable to much of the world. This somewhat fits in with my own conjecture. The true dynamic puissance of global networking on both societal and business organizations cannot be unerringly measured or estimated until we experience real global accessibility. Worldwide interconnectivity in an absolute sense is has not yet been achieved; as such, depictions of futuristic societies, technological advancements, and networking potentials remain a subject of contemplation. It is in this ambience that the contents of "Digital Delirium" should be read and analyzed.
