[lit-ideas] domination and resistance in social networks
- From: "phatic" <phatic@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 19 Mar 2004 13:31:07 -0000
OK, so I gotta update this blog. Went to listen to <a
href="http://sociology.berkeley.edu/faculty/castells/";>Manuel
Castells'</a> lecture on <a
href="http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/LSEPublicLecturesAndEvents/even
ts/ 2004/20031222t1012z001.htm">"Politics and Power in the Network
Society"</a> at London School of Economics yesterday. A lot could be
said. The most profound flabbergastation was derived from audience
watching. LSE students aren't nearly as outer-worldly as us of the
provinces sometimes fancy. Or, uhh, well, they are, kinda. Anyway,
this paragraph isn't leading anywhere.
Highlights:
* There is a CRISIS OF POLITICAL LEGITIMACY!!! Big news from Castells
here. He's referring to party politics in the parliamentary form, but
"forgot" to mention that caveat. Oh, and he knows his Poulanzas.
During the Q&A Castells was courting the Angry Young Marxists to Step
Forward so he could Baffle them with his knowledge of Marxist History
and why it Failed. Great.
* The Arnold-vote was NOT a vote to the right but "a vote to
terminate the political class." Snappy line, but, again, Castells
scores on conflating "politics" with "professional party politicians
operating under liberal democratic institutions." So it's a protest
vote to him. Besides patronizing the electorate (interpellated as
"citizens" in Castells' discourse), it also situates the speaker in
the comfortable center. The angry ones, those who don't understand
grown-ups' politics, they are extremists! Boo!
* Interesting quantitative tid-bit: In Inglehart's <a
href="http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/";>World Values Survey</a> we
may extrapolate that regional identification figured more prominently
in Southern Europe, while national identification was more pronounced
in Northern Europe. FWIW.
* Castells conflates the theatrical aspect of contemporary mediated
politics with the unreliable. He claims the electorate doesn't trust
politicians anymore. But what's new about this? Did the serf ever
trust that the landlord had the serf's best interest in mind? Should
politicians and the political system be regarded as some kind of god
we should respond dutifully to when asked to sacrifice our children?
Hey, Castells, go kill me a son.
* The rest of the talk was actually about Power in Social Networks.
Far more Foucauldian and hence interesting. Problem is he wants it
both ways. He wants to maintain a notion of agency ("social actors")
and at the same time claim that if you're outside the network you're
powerless. It's a tricky one. Would it be possible to be in/outside
except in a sense of individual connectivity? (Besides, does it
really hold? There are linkages to the WWW even for those not
actually online?)
There's more to be said. Perhaps I'll return to Castells' theory of
domination and resistance in networks. He ended his lecture by
mentioning how the demonstrations in Spain last Saturday had been
organized by way of SMS, WiFi and other networked technologies. The
participation of young voters increased dramatically from last
election. (So there is hope? So Castells is a spokesperson for
liberal parliamentarism, no?)
--
phatic
phatic@xxxxxxxxxx
http://phatic.blogspot.com
-------------------------------------------------------
This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous
content by The University of Surrey Roehampton
MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
- » [lit-ideas] domination and resistance in social networks
