Ansgar Heveling and internet culture War of the Worlds?

It is a very confusing text that has left me with many question marks. I therefore formulate my subheadings as questions – I am grateful for answers.

Historical consciousness without historicity?

„Be history“ – I have been thinking for a long time about the sense in which Ansgar Heveling speaks of history here. The only interpretation I can imagine is: “being history” = being over. This is a conceivable but nonsensical interpretation, because history is never over, and every event, no matter how small, leaves traces. The life we live today, our views, our culture, even our mere existence is based on the history of those who lived before us – and is therefore “real” in a way that cannot be wiped away with “gone.” Why should such a profound development as Web 2.0 be an exception here? It is not without a certain irony that a “history-conscious politician”, of all people, should make this faux pas. It is not his only one.

Opinion without arguments?

His statement that the internet community will lose the fight is likely to become a familiar saying. It is a bold and therefore exciting thesis, and now would be a good time for arguments. In fact, there are good reasons to question the hopes of digital culture – Becky Hogge does so in her eBook “Barefoot into Cyberspace”. Ansgar Heveling, on the other hand, seems to have little interest in exchanging arguments.

Heveling does admit that digitalization is changing our society – although he seems to have little to offer except the aspect that many things are becoming easier. And since “narcissism and nerdzism are twins,” he does not mention the cultural exchange on the net with a single word – Creative Commons, free software, collaborative work, all this plays no role in an argument that has little to offer besides black-and-white painting.

From apples to oranges?

So it is an “unholy alliance of these ‘digital Maoists’ and well-funded monopolists”, and as examples, Ansgar Heveling lists Google and Wikipedia. Now, it is not necessarily the case that Google and Wikipedia are easy to compare – after all, Google is a company, whereas Wikipedia is supported by the Wikimedia Foundation, that is, a foundation. The fact that the two players have fundamentally different financing models is not mentioned by the author.

As a weapon against the loss of intellectual property, he invokes “Goethe, the Bible or even Marx”, who should be quoted. But why exactly public-domain works, which are freely accessible through digitization, should prevent only “scorched earth of our culture” from remaining – that is a question that only Ansgar Heveling can answer.

The democracy I mean?

What is Ansgar Heveling ultimately trying to say in his article? He calls on citizens to be vigilant in defending civil society on the internet. In other words, he is calling for democracy, for “freedom, democracy and property on the internet too”. It took me a while to realize why I find Heveling’s commentary so strange – it is the tone that does not match this conclusion. There is talk of a “battle between the brave new digital world and real life”. There is talk of a “media battle order” and an “endgame for Middle-earth”. There is the danger that “after the digital hordes have left and the battle fog has lifted, only the ruinous stumps of our society will stretch into the sun”. War metaphors. War metaphors.

I described this as inappropriate in a tweet, and at the end of the day it is about different conceptions of culture. It is about people who emphasize intellectual property and want to protect economic interests on the one hand, and people who care about the free exchange of knowledge and culture on the other. Above all, however, it is about the many positions in between, and it is about finding a meaningful compromise in this area of tension. In doing so, however, dear Mr. Heveling, war metaphors are of little help. And to accuse those who think differently of “digital totalitarianism”, in the words of Jaron Lavier, is even less helpful.

And if you meant this as satire, please write a simple “LOL” under your comment next time.