¶ Sovereignty (2)
← Sovereignty (1) | Sovereignty →
Index Entry
The effect of telegraphy on the news was mostly one-way, despatches from the field; by and large they provided no response. Democracy works on one-to-one correspondence, but now our communications are not working that way. In 1940 I explored the technology of communications, how if everyone voted daily would it affect the frequency of telephone use. Now we wonder if there might not be some electromagnetic patterns from the brain with all of humanity manifesting some kind of high-frequency electromagnetic, yes-or-no-field.
If the satellite sensors are mapping our beef cattle, might they not also have a capability of picking up how humanity feels about a question. It’s all going to be completely different from the ways of the past. You mentioned world government. There could be a sort of city management concept taking its orders from a consensus of humanity. Of course the majority might often be wrong, but with such instant communication errors would be recognized soon enough to correct them. Measuring what humanity is really thinking.
“Servomechanisms work this way. All this is technically looming into view.”
¶ Citations
- RBF at Senate Foreign Affairs Subcommittee Hearing on US role in UN, Senate Office Bldg., Wash. DC, 15 May’75 (EJA live notes)
