Re: [-empyre-] Re: developing nations and elitists

["Melinda Rackham" <melinda@unsw.edu.au>]

yes i did apologise for the term "developing" before i used it.. as i'm
relaly well aware its loaded and that there is hideous injustice  in the
world.., however my point was not specifically about the socio-political
situation in sepcifc countries.. more generally that technological uptake
doesn't follow a prescriptive path.. and that often devices are used not for
the purposes for which they were originally intended..  mobile networks and
pdas can be utilised in incredibly subversive ways....
once upon a time there only supposed to be uses for 3 computers in the whole
world -who would have predicted the networks of the web and hactivism.
 rtmark and toywars is great example..


and there probably is no point  preaching to the converted..(except they
seem to appreciate it) but perhps positioning nomadic, mobile and pda art
within conservative contexts does open up the non converted . if you are
interrested in social change, as well as  informing the ones with no
resources who utilise all thier energy to barely stay alive..  its probably
a good idea to seduce the ones with influence, money and political power who
actually can easily enact change on  a larger scale.

i think there is also a place for art that brings wonder and joy and fun in
the world.. and a value for it as well.  we need it -.. and i dont belive
its  a denial or disavowal of the global injustices to actually apprecaite
what life style or technology you do have access to.

m


> Melinda,
>
> Could you tell me which developing nations you have in mind? There are
vast
> differences between all the developing nations.
>
> Having an extensive mobile network is a result of a government's agenda
and
> budget priorities and these networks amongst other things can exist whilst
> ordinary people in any country including developed/ing nations thrash out
a
> living just trying to survive and feed themselves, maybe their kids. You
> will find that few citizens of developing nations can afford mobile
phones,
> let alone PDAs or laptops. If many people in these developing nations can
> afford technology, it is because their country has recently become or is
on
> the cusp of becoming developed themselves. (read: high GDP, higher incomes
> comparatively - and I'm not talking NY investment banker incomes either.)
>
> And let's not limit our scope to developing nations. The US, long a
> developed nation, still struggles to connect most of their population. I
> don't know the figures off-hand but the "digital divide" was on the
Clinton
> agenda.
>
> Notwithstanding the problems associated with the terms "developed" and
> "developing" and "first, second and third worlds".
>
> Of unethical nations who do watch their people starve whilst building
> advanced digital technology ahead of, let's say, sewerage systems and
clean
> water, their priorities are often criticised by human rights and ethic
> groups.
>
> But hey, globalisation is going to save the world right?
>
> JA
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyrean/empyre
>
>