The Central Paradox of the Digital Age

Civilizations are mortal. Some rise to meet their challenges, others collapse and disappear into history. Why do some posses the capacity to change, and others not? Jared Diamond warns that the Anthropocentric Age, in which the human species for the first time is the dominant influence on the planet, could end up like the extinct Maya, terminating our civilization's accomplishments if we don't squarely face our ecological challenges. Bruce Mau, like Alvin Toffler, sees hope in the “distributed power” enabled by new technologies. Jared Cohen and Eric Schmidt examine the paradoxes of the digital age which has transformed how we live our lives in every respect.     

Uganda's Progress and Problems

The following address was given by the former Governor of Ugandaat a joint meeting of the Royal African Society and the RoyalEmpire Society on February 7, 1957. Sir John Macpherson tookthe chair.     

On Compromise and Coercion*

Abstract. This essay addresses the concepts of compromise and coercion. When compromise takes place between two or more parties, reciprocity must be present; that is, the concessions are mutual. A relevant distinction is between principled and tactical compromise. A principled compromise refers to a mutual recognition by each side of the other's rights, which leads them to make concessions to enable them to meet on a middle ground. It is genuinely made in good faith and both sides reconcile themselves to the results. On the other hand, the notion of tactical compromise reflects a temporary arrangement reached as a result of constraints related to time. Here, in fact, agents do not give up any of their aims. They do not act in good faith and do not intend to meet their counterpart on a middle ground. Instead, they simply realize that the end could not be achieved at a given point of time, and they aim to reach it stage by stage. The essential component of compromise, namely, mutuality, is lacking. Next, the paper draws a further distinction between internalized coercion and designated coercion. Internalized coercion relates to the system of manipulation to which members of a certain sub‐culture are subjected, which prevents them from realizing that they are being coerced to follow a certain conception that denies them basic rights. Designated coercion is individualistic in nature, aimed at a certain individual who rebels against the discriminatory norm. Unlike the internalized coercion it is not concerned with machinery aiming to convince the entire cultural group of an irrefutable truth; instead it is designed to exert pressure on uncertain, “confused” individuals so as to bring them back to their community. Ever since I assumed my present office my main purpose has been to work for the pacification of Europe, for the removal of those suspicions and those animosities which have so long poisoned the air. The path which leads to appeasement is long and bristles with obstacles. The question of Czechoslovakia is the latest and perhaps the most dangerous. Now that we have got past it, I feel that it may be possible to make further progress along the road to sanity. (Neville Chamberlain, “Peace in Our Time”, October 3, 1938) **