Participation in President '96

In President '96 survey participation actually has direct effects on the various candidates. One must register one's name and e-mail address with a specific candidate, and thereafter access to that candidate's campaign headquarters are provided. Here at the headquarters, one fills out a different survey form, exclusively for candidate supporters, and the final tallies of this survey determine the stand (and strategy) that one's candidate will take. Certainly such a method represents a more direct form of democratic participation akin to that of ancient Athens, where ideally each citizen was given one vote in the legislative process, and majority ruled. Consequently, this type of democracy severely undercuts the autonomy of individual politicians.

To glimpse the process by which Independent candidate Jim McLaren's staff makes its decisions, Teleport to "Candidate HQ." At the 'user name' prompt type in "gaynord@gusun.georgetown.edu" and "95reds" for
the password. Here one can read biographical information about the candidate, e-mail suggestions to McLaren or read others' opinions about the McLaren campaign. The section titled 'Decision Reports' always begins with the phrase "Here's what you said McLaren should say..." Of course, in this section of President '96 one has become a member of the candidate's staff and thus has more input, but this type of process emphasizes the possibilities of increased participation through computer technologies.

On the Usenet Debate page at "alt.games.pres96.misc" one can also express one's opinions, in this case to other players who may have similar or divergent viewpoint's from one's own. In real life, perhaps the candidates would also join in discussions, and monitor these exchanges closely in order to gauge public sentiment. The Usenet debate seems to fulfill the many of the rules of Habermas's ideal speech situation, where "Everyone is allowed to express his attitudes, desires and needs (Ess 243)."

Cyberspace provides people with the opportunity not only to lobby politicians (this capability existed before computers), but to engage in an expanded discourse with other citizens about various topics, regardless of geography. This type of interaction can also provide like-minded individuals with an instrument for seeking each other out. New coalitions can be formed and the possibility for mobilization and action increases. Yet for the type cyberdemocracy envisioned in President '96 to occur in a manner concordant with Habermas's view of democracy, "No speaker may be prevented, by internal or external coercion from exercising his rights" to speak (Ess 243).

Unfortunately, at the current moment most of those who are online are white, affluent and male. A structure which facilitates greater democratic access to information and participation can only contradict itself when the only group heard is the status quo.