|Table of Contents|

Critique of intercourse mode of internet community in the post “PRISM” era(PDF)

《长安大学学报（社科版）》[ISSN:1671-6248/CN:61-1391/C]

Issue:
2017年03期
Page:
124-130
Research Field:
新闻传播学
Publishing date:

Info

Title:
Critique of intercourse mode of internet community in the post “PRISM” era
Author(s):
LV Yan1; DING She-jiao1;  WEI Zheng2
1. School of Marxism, Northwestern Polytechnical University;
2. Development Planning Department, Northwestern Polytechnical University
Keywords:
cyber space;  communicative action;  community of common destiny;  internet community;  intercourse mode
PACS:
C912
DOI:
-
Abstract:
The incident of “PRISM” caused that the “the real” of internet community was magnified, and remodeling the understanding and consensus among heterogeneous agents became a core issue. The structure and intercourse mode of internet community were comparatively analyzed. The research shows that the western world has a tendency to promote the flattening of structure, praise highly norms of the market and emphasize pluralistic governance towards the intercourse relationship of internet community. The derived intercourse mode of internet community of “decentralization”, “western centralization” and “polycentricity” is hard to remodel the sincere, true and legitimate communicative action. The reason for its “temporary solution to a permanent cure” lies in the implicit internal logic of “the rule of things to human beings”, and intercourse relationship which is distorted and alienated is the inevitable results of capitalist mode of production. Various agents of community of common destiny in cyber space can conduct a moral discussion about how to realize the most widespread commonality in the community to reestablish the preexistence of the collective to the individual. The advocated interconnection and shared governance reflects its transcendence. This community of common destiny attempts to remodel communicative action among agents in the real rather than abstract community needs and political consensus, which is also the structural reflection towards the current intercourse relationship of internet community.

References:

［1］哈贝马斯.交往行动理论:行动的合理化和社会的合理化：第一卷［M］.中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局，编.洪佩郁，蔺青，译.重庆:重庆出版社，1994.
［2］王文东,赵艳琴.网络空间的非正义性剖析——基于空间正义的研究视角［J］.甘肃理论学刊，2013(1):25-29.
［3］蔡翠红.国家-市场-社会互动中网络空间的全球治理［J］.世界经济与政治，2013(9):90-112.
［4］任孟山.网络安全议题的国际传播政治学:话语竞争与权力博弈［J］.现代传播：中国传媒大学学报，2015(7):143-146.
［5］方兴东,张笑容，胡怀亮.棱镜门事件与全球网络空间安全战略研究［J］.现代传播：中国传媒大学学报，2014，36(1):115-122.
［6］王明国.全球互联网治理的模式变迁、制度逻辑与重构路径［J］.世界经济与政治，2015(3):47-73.
［7］储昭根.浅议“棱镜门”背后的网络信息安全［J］.国际观察,2014(2):56-67.
［8］邵国松.损益比较原则下的国家安全和公民自由权——基于棱镜门事件的考察［J］.南京社会科学,2014(2):122-129.
［9］周琪.“棱镜门”事件对美国和国际社会的影响［J］.中国党政干部论坛,2013(7):35-35.
［10］王孔祥.网络安全的治理路径探析［J］.教学与研究,2014,48(8):59-66.
［11］高金萍,尹婉莹.“棱镜门”事件中的社会正义与国家利益博弈［J］.国际新闻界,2014,36(4):97-108.
［12］马克思,恩格斯.马克思恩格斯全集：第三卷［M］.中共中央马克思恩格斯列宁斯大林著作编译局，编译.北京:人民出版社，2002.
［13］约翰·费斯克.电视文化［M］.祁阿红,张鲲，译.北京:商务印书馆,2010.
［14］习近平.在第二届世界互联网大会开幕式上的讲话［N］.人民日报，2015-12-17(2).
［15］刁小行.多元价值的均衡：沃尔泽政治哲学研究［M］.北京：中国社会科学出版社，2014.
［16］迈克尔·沃尔泽.正义诸领域：为多元主义与平等一辩［M］.褚松燕，译.南京：译林出版社，2002.
［17］哈贝马斯.在事实与规范之间:关于法律和民主治国的商谈理论［M］.童世骏，译.北京:三联书店，2003.

Memo

Memo:
-
Last Update: 2017-07-11