Mondovision is also doing a location based online doco – here are some of my thoughts…
We Are Where We Live?
Location based communities exist in a very ‘real’ sense and certainly are significant part of how we define ourselves. ‘Where do you live?’ like ‘What do you do for a living?’ are questions asked as ways to get to know each other. Why is this? Do particular areas gain particular identities which are then say something about the people that live in them? Or do similar types of people live in certain areas which then comes to define the area?
Representative Democracy.
Location based communities exist in a very ‘real’ sense and certainly are significant part of how we define ourselves. ‘Where do you live?’ like ‘What do you do for a living?’ are questions asked as ways to get to know each other. Why is this? Do particular areas gain particular identities which are then say something about the people that live in them? Or do similar types of people live in certain areas which then comes to define the area? Our layers of government are in a sense based on the idea that location based communities exist. We elect representatives for federal, state and local parliments based on geography. Our cost of living is even affected by where we live – just consider the vast differences in housing and grocery costs even within the Melbourne metropolitan area. It can even affect our personal safety and likelihood of losing possesions to a home invader.
That’s Nationstate Not Nationmate…
These ideas are particularly pertinent when viewed in a global context. It is very clear that our quality of life and identity is largely determined by where we live. Will the nationstate eventually be transcended? The idea of global community takes on a utopian hue when consideration is given to how many problems could be solved. Manuel Castell’s argues that:
In my empirical investigation I have found identity-based social movements aimed at changing the cultural foundations of society to be the essential sources of social change in the information age…[s]ome movements, that appear to be the most fruitful and positive, are proactive, such as feminism and environmentalism. Some are reactive, as in the communal resistances to globalization built around religion, nation, territory, or ethinicity. But in all cases they affirm the preeminence of experience over instrumentality, of meaning over function, and, I would dare to say, of use value of life over exchange value in the networks. (Castells:1996, pp 409 -10).
So perhaps the key question as we enter a new era of human evolution is the same one that humans have always grappled with – who are we and how do we live together?
Castells, Manuel (1996). “An Introduction to the information age”, reprinted in The Media Reader: Continuity and Transformation. Edited by Hugh Mackay and Tim O’Sullivan London: Sage, pages 398-410 (Originally an address to the Conference on Information and the City, Oxford, 1996).
Hey.
I think that this is a very complicated socio political problem and the people who suggest that globalization or technology can change anything are fairly naive. I don’t see a simple way of reforming our society.
The very question that you mention, where do you live’, etc. are indicative of the perceptions that we have about our society.
The reason why we ask the question is very complicated. But what is obvious is that we have particular collective anxieties, class related, and no technology can make them go away. They are not going anywhere unless we attempt to reform our thinking and our cultural theories which show no attempt to promote equality of any kind.The extent to which this problem affects our society is best observed in educational institutions, universities and primary and secondary schools. And the state, in this country and in other countries, is doing very little to change that. ‘Me’ is angry. lol.
It is strange that our collective anxieties do not become the basis for stronger community building. Knowing that others experience things in a similar fashion can actually be divisive. Personally, I regard educational institutions – particularly at a tertiary level – as among the most progressive social institutions in the sense that there is at least a token attempt to grapple with contentious ideas and issues.
Equality – as with most things – is relative. I agree that some people, ideas and technologies are more equal than others, however I think the main problem is equal access to education. Cultural theories constantly evolve and I also agree that we are being held back socially by outmoded ideologies. I don’t know how we begin to change things but I hope that I continue hoping that things will change…lol.