Time will courage! As mentioned in Part 1, is the democracy of the vital needs of humanity created for a just and secure society. The tool for the creation of theoretical democracy were primary sources. Among them is the Socratic dialogue, the active group communication or a simple lecture classes, so basically free communication technology. A strong influence on democracy and its current state, took the development of secondary and tertiary sources. This includes books, as well as television and radio. The similarities of these technical media are that they carry only one-sided information exchange. This bias has a strong influence on the communication in practical democracy. If one still brought capitalism, which was formed parallel to democracy in order to regulate trade, it appears that the more willing investors is the transmission of information. The result is a power structure that excludes alternative information indirectly.
has technologised But now the human race a quaternary medium developed that could serve as a tool in a democracy. The language of Web 2.0, or colloquially as the Internet. The WEB2.0 allowing two-way information transfer. At the same time but also it is contrary to any current rule of neo-liberalism and capitalism, since the dual exchange of information with high or not connected only with balanced costs. The consequences are that an individual is exposed to a flood of information. Since humans perceive different a medium, he begins to select. The longer this selection takes place and the individual deal with the WEB2.0 is, the more suspicious it is compared to the information brokers. The fatal consequences of this are that the trend decline for a just society. The Web2.0 is therefore a danger to the current democracies in the world. It changes the social setting, the collective Behavior and general knowledge.
allows the other hand, this form of dual communication, a detailed theoretical and faster implementation of democracy. The reason is obvious, since it is caused by primary sources (eg debate), that is also a form of dual communication. "Back to the roots."
Suitable examples are the websites that offer platforms to create social networks. There it is possible so-called communities (social groups) to join, or start new ones, to share his personal views and opinions. From collectivist motives and is decidedly non-capitalist democratic, whether this information is socially relevant. In summary, therefore, is that WEB2.0 may present a danger to the practice implemented in democracies, but at the same time it corrects the error mentioned. The danger, then only that the practical democracy slipping closer to the theoretical. Such an abnormal change makes the people to fear and anxiety also created mistrust of the new medium. But the time has come, now missing is the courage ...
end.
