The Commons

I hadn't thought much about libraries' role in democracy, or in this new information movement we are in, until reading Bollier's quite interesting speech.  I probably went to the library every single week day as a kid, and spent at least and hour there most visits.  As I grew up the internet became my library and/or I bought books because I wanted to mark them up with my own notes and comments (and that is quite frowned upon by most librarians).  Never, until now, has it occurred to me how vital these facilities are to democracy.  


As Bollier points out, spreading knowledge is an essential part of democracy.  America was founded, after all, out of a need to escape one-minded ideals, and yet it seems that more and more democracy is failing.  Libraries are a piece of our society that are still, for the most part, wholly democratic;  they offer knowledge and information to everyone free of charge.  It is saddening to read and think about the financial cutbacks that libraries are being faced with, an underhanded effort to control the information they distribute freely.  It seems that Bollier wanted to encourage librarians to embrace the Internet and the Commons, not be against it as I think they sometimes may be.  Anymore, libraries, especially university libraries, have their own digital database of articles and even entire books at times.  It is a commons within a commons.  Given this, librarians can look to even more ways to expand democracy and encourage the commons, they just have to keep building on the original ideas in place.  They especially need to develop a new philosophy as Bollier mentions.


~~


Anarchy has a negative connotation; just chaos and disruption, not beneficial but overly radical.  Siva Vaidhyanathan turns that idea however, and looks at anarchy as we encounter it every day.  Anarchy in the library does exist and has existed thus far; the library functions or should function outside the authorities.  These facilities may be funded federally, but that is supposed to be the end of government interference with libraries - they are to have no say over what and how knowledge and information is distributed.  This freedom is in danger however, oligarchy seems to be creeping into libraries slowly but surely.  I believe that Siva hopes for the educated to stand up and discuss this issue more indepth, coming to solutions via human interaction and discussion not quick [hopeful] fixes via technology.  We can find ways around laws and restrictions all we want, but it won't make any difference if the attitude toward the entirety of the commons doesn't change.  


One thing I found particularly interesting was Siva's mention of the "collapse of inconvenience" and how that sparked all these laws and restrictions in an attempt to prevent the mass public from getting percieved "bad stuff" easily.  Democracy is suppose to allow freedom of thought and speech and ideals, yet they try to give us tunnel vision claiming it is better for society and democracy.  I know that Siva mentions fearing anarchy while not turning your back on it; he also points out that a "'smart mob' is still a mob." This is true.  But, for the time being, I say we embrace anarchy.  Sometimes the only way to get change is to be radical, at least for a little while.  I think we can all see, not just with the problems of copyright and information restrictions, but with everything in our current society, that democracy is kind of failing, and both of these readings as well as the website are calling for efforts to change that.