Tumeke Blunders

Although a consistent reader of that emphatic critic Martin "Bomber" Bradbury's blog Tumeke, it is with great surprise and sadness that I read Tim Selwyn's ill-thought through response to a post on FrogBlog.

The Green party blog attempted an - I admit somewhat silly - argument on how 1.5billion invested into ultra-fast internet would be wasted money. They argue this on the grounds that: 1. There is no need for such fast speeds. 2. Attention should not be taken away from those consumers who only need the very basics of broadband 3. the economic benefits are uncertain and 4. international bandwidth is the bottleneck.

Selwyn utterly discredited himself with his response:

the Greens are proving once again that they are at their core nothing more than modern day 'Flat Earthers' and that they will use any argument at all (even if it is internally incoherent) in order to align everything to their mantra of stasis

Such knee-jerk reactions are usually loathed on Tumeke. But he gets even worse. In response to the Greens claim

We tend to think that more of a good thing is better and that the things which worked well for us in the past will continue to work well in the future. I see ‘ultra fast broadband’ as a small part of that pattern, along with SUVs, iPads (with $30/mo 3G connection!) transmission gully and Airbus A320s. I see blindness about infinite economic growth on a finite planet (with it’s side effects of climate change and peak oil) as part of that too.

Sometimes, more is just not necessary and simply becomes an extra burden to carry

...Selwyn comments...

This is so moronic it is no wonder the four arguments put up to support the proposition were so flawed. Do they deserve to be in parliament? It is one thing to claim that sometimes more of a good thing isn't better - it's just a burden (we may agree this could apply to chocolate, cocaine, fossil fuel devouring engines and so on); but to claim that this applies to the speed of the internet - the flow of communications and the means of displacing wasteful alternatives (eg. having to commute to work) - is possibly the most idiotic thing I have ever heard from a political party.

I do not presume to defend FrogBlog's argument. And in part I agree with Selwyn: the communication of information is now one of the major crutches of the developed world. Business especially hinges their success on their tele-communication abilities.

What I have trouble with is the "moronic" nature of Selwyn's response. He has jumped straight onto the old bandwagon of painting the Green party as out-of-touch lunatics, putting no thought into what the backdrop to their argument is.

It is always difficult to play the prophet, but the Green party correctly understand the trap that is technology - even technology that seems such a blessing. Whether they are correct in their specific suspicion of the pursuit for greater, and faster internet is questionable. But they can see how the world can no longer sustain itself on the amazing technologies that have offered little except short-term consumer satisfaction and greater Co2 levels in the atmosphere. Their place in parliament is to push the reality than we can no longer think of "more, bigger, faster, better" in terms that are parallel or synonymous with prosperity and happiness. We don't know how much of a trap our evolving tele-communications technology can be, just as the early architects of industrialism couldn't see the dangers that lay in the assembly line, or the factory. But - even if they are wrong - the Green party is still trying to look through the darkness, to offer something constructive.

And for that, Tim Selwyn, they deserve more respect. I expect better from Tumeke.