I would just add a few thoughts to this discussion, both in the hopes of tempering Mr. Goodwin’s boundless libertarian optimism and adding some historical perspective.
Do we really think it’s simply true that the anonymity of the internet fosters extremism, or to put it less hyperbolically, immoderation? Consider ancient Athens at, say, 350 or 400 B.C.: this was a small democracy, where everyone knew everyone else or at least knew a neighbor or relative that could provide experience of personal acquaintance with everyone else (at the very least, the voting assembly all knew each other). Was this society a paragon of moderation? To again bring up the inestimable Publius, wasn’t the point of the extended republic the thoroughly sensible one that, as much as we cannot change human nature, we should do our best to tamp down its vices and elevate its virtues?
Faction, and various species of extremism, are natural to humans, especially free ones. Doesn’t the Internet, in a way, facilitate the multiplicity of viewpoints that we might consider a corollary of Madison’s multiplicity of interests? Sure, it’s full of junk, but we can also observe the phenomena—not unlike Publius’ discussion of ‘men of a certain reputation’ rising to the top of their communities and then securing national office—of certain more reputable, trusted, and sensible purveyors of Internet opinion, on both sides of the political spectrum, rising to prominence.
Just a word about etiquette. I’m not so convinced that it is anything more than a neutral force (rather than an actively moderating one). Take the court of France under Louis XIV or under the restored Bourbon monarchy after Napoleon—it was, if nothing else, the site of some of the most refined manners and etiquette imaginable. This etiquette, however, was the veneer for a vain, preening, hypocritical, and thoroughly corrupt oligarchic society. I don’t mean to draw any solid analogy to today—I would just offer the possibility of considering etiquette as neither good nor bad, but rather dependent on the end it serves.
My great fear about the internet, and this is related to Bill’s original post only in the most tangential way, is the effect it is having on our minds. Admittedly, this is a long-term worry. A collectively shortened attention span and a societal inability for sustained and deep reflection cannot bode well for the future of self-government. Perhaps a future Dissense discussion might involve a group review of this new book by Nicholas Carr.