Wow! Moore comes right out of the gate and slams the US for its belligerency at home and abroad. Well, I can't say I disagree but commencing an article with such obvious bias won't make the reader feel like the article is an objective, informed piece.
Just a thought as I started reading, and touching on something I said in my post about 'netizens'. The internet is the first truly international political scene, but the barriers between communication haven't been erased even though thoughts are being sent and received electronically; users around the world speak different languages, use different sites to communicate with each-other (usually other citizens of their nation). Simply put, the internet's existence doesn't necessarily change the fundamental underpinnings of international relationships.
I do like what Moore says about 'bottom-up' movements, especially his comment that the 'second superpower' desires policy improvements on issues like global warming, human rights, third-world rights, etc., that the US government doesn't seem to really care about. This is interesting to me because such grassroot organization and mobilization will, I am sure, amount to much needed change. With the internet as a tool to organize people with shared desires, it will only become easier and easier to affect the change that typical US citizens (or should I say 'netizens') want for a better world.
His message about the power of a mind in the second superpower also rings with truth. The representative democracy in which we've found ourselves has, in my opinion, become a bloated, grotesque mis-representation of what was originally envisioned by our fore-fathers, who lived in a much more compact and less populated country than we've found ourselves in today. It is very true that these representatives wield a disproportionate amount of power. An occasional vote which counts for very little won't affect much change, especially because this type of voting discourages one from educating oneself about the issue. The largest advantage I see from an internet culture, or even an internet society, is that facts and information must always be (and, conveniently, can be) corroborated by other online sources and informations. One without an extensive political background (and wealth, for how else can one run for office) yet regarded as an intelligent, thought-provoking individual will be able to amass influence and respect on an online forum by virtue of his ideas, something that will most likely never happen again in US politics. The internet society is more fluid, less bound by regulations and stubborness and greed, more easily molded into the shape which helps the greatest number of peoples.