Lambasting and the Dead Kennedys

Blogging. I suppose that this is the moment when I should evaluate my place in all of this racey bloggetry and tie my ideas into those of Barton in all of his rational-critical debate, all the while publicly, openly using this public sphere in an attempt to sythezize my thoughts on the matter.

This won’t be an epiphany entry I assure you, dear reader, so stop shuddering. What is the future of rational critical debate? Can it be left up to the (at (large)) public to set up a self-policing system for the internet?

The "Internet can serve either to "reflect in every institution the logic of modern production" or
enable "the flexible testing of possibilities and the development of the new—not hierarchical
and standardization but variety and growth of the capacities required to live in a more complex
world"

I enjoy the idea of rational critical debate because it hints to me of that sometimes elusive productivity within a discussion session. But can the public really operate with a non-hierarchical system set up for communication and the distribution of ideas? When I ask that question, I’m not asking if people can operate under a non-hierarchical system, but rather, will it actually happen? It seems that the idea of unrestrained freedom will begin to run into walls after a time. Someone will want to be able to own the popular idea– it becomes pop culture owned by the rich and displayed on a mantle piece.

To me, right now, the internet is rebellious pop-culture, destined to go the way of The Dead Kennedys or Cindy Lauper, except for the strength of the public.

So I guess what I’m pondering around is that while I’m not a huge fan of blogging and I don’t have much experience or faith in the wiki, at least we have it. "We" have the option to contribute and correct and question. We, as a pubic, have the right to our opinions, and the right to post them, no matter how crazy, insightful, or inane. The web has become our own interpretive project.