I have been reading Netocracy by Bard and Soderqvist (see 2nd May) and am inspired by how much it has stimulated my thoughts - even though I am only on chapter two! Chapter one gave a comprehensive, albeit a rather simplified, background of the history of technology and its effects through the ages as the "Driving force of History".

It starts with an anecdote about a Japanese soldier, isolated in the Asian jungle, still fighting the second world war several decades after it had ended. This introduces us to the concept that "available information dictates which thoughts and actions are possible". So many things were mentioned which sent my brain off into other tangents. In the space of a few pages we are asked to think about fiction and reality and how "unaccommodating realities is a recurrent theme in literature" Don Quixote, Othello, Raskolnikov and Emma Bovary being cited as examples of their own ignorance.

A brief journey through the history of the written word up to the use of the internet introduces us to further technological revolutions in methods of communication. Ideas are then sown for changes and shake-up's of social structures and paradigms. Sweeping

generalisations are made in the effort to rush us through time and paradigms (favourite word of the day now) The
Enlightenment, Feudalism, Capitalism, Informationalism, Communism, Christianity, Protestantism, Aristocracy, Bourgeoisie, Libertarianism, Free Will. Famous names are dropped into sentences like a sprinkling of intellectual condiments. Jacques Ellul, Copernicus, Einstein, Newton, Claude Levi-Strauss, Diderot, Nietzsche, Darwin, Deleuze, Foucault, Descartes, Bacon, Balzac, Jared Diamond, Hegel (and of course, not quite in this category but also mentioned, Bill Gates!).

At this point I was getting so much brain stimulation, I was in need of a metaphorical ice-cold drink to cool my cerebral juices, because I had started to remember all the things I have ever studied and waves of intellectual excitement were surging through my body at an inexplicable rate. It was like remembering my first sighting of a room full of Impressionist paintings in the Quai d'Orsay, a true feast of eye candy.

Furthering our introduction to life, the world and everything else the authors turn to psychological explanations such as cognitive dissonance to explain our

reluctance to accept new ideas which in turn can lead to intellectual sluggishness" - no fear of that! I was by now beginning to suffer from exhaustion as a result of this intellectual high and was hitting a rapid descent causing my mind to interpret everthing written on at least three different levels, global, societal and personal. The latter being very preoccupying (to me anyway). Chapter one ends with the enigmatic the "one thing we can say without doubt is that it
will not be the meek who will inherit the Earth"

The explanation of paradigm shifts was comprehensive and again very thought provoking. Buddha was mentioned for his realization that "We have to choose between nirvana, a state of permanent calm, and accepting that everything around us is in constant motion and change,
which brings with it an inescapable need for constant adaptation". However for me, the section which stuck in my mind the most in chapter two was the following: "the existance of people who still defend the communist project is explained by the fact that this is a matter of religious faith, whose irrationality is a blind spot in the otherwise perpetual invocation of logic.........It is quite conceivable that had the last Russian Tsar publicaly declared his belief in

atheism, he would have denied communism much of its appeal and thereby prevented the Russian Revolution."
We know this would not have been possible because to do that would have been to "recognise the illegitimacy of his position". Isn't it ironic that over a century later our so-called "great leaders" are still playing the same games with the use of their spin-doctors.

Anyway, that's just a brief introduction
to the book, as you can see, I find it fascinating, if not a little generalistic in parts. If I can stick with it until chapter 7 "The new biology and netocratic ethics" I'll keep you up to date. Better still, why not get yourselves a copy and discuss it with me by leaving your comments. I know there are many of you out there who will find some of these concepts interesting.