Skip navigation

Ranciere’s description of democracy as a a fundamental paradox which defines a political system in which the grounds for political rule is that there are no grounds for political rule (lest it become a technocracy or oligarchy) is an interesting way to think about certain internet institutions, such as Anonymous. As was discussed a little during ┬áthis Wednesday’s lecture, it’s strange that we have and continue to think about the internet as a democratic space because it has never, in implementation, been regulated in a democratic way. However, using Ranciere’s description of the democracy as paradoxical, perhaps we can consider the role of the internet in providing spaces for/allowing to exist certain communities like Anonymous which arguably fit some of Ranciere’s descriptions of operating democracies. Anonymous is, in theory, an organized community in which anyone can suggest an organized call to action and anyone who can find a point of entry can join. If the heart of democracy is dissent and reenactment, an excess of political action from the people which both undermines existing government and suggests new ways of governance, it is useful to think of the ways Anonymous engages in exactly these descriptions. In thinking about democracy as action, and the opening up of new communities that enact equal power, I think it is necessary to consider Anonymous as a case study of an implementation of democracy as action. And if the internet is not democratic, can┬áthe communities it enables be democratic?