Trust No One!
by - 11.05.2004 22:42
Some Remarks on the Political Economy of Virtual and Global Networking
Christoph Spehr
Hong Kong
Trust No One!
1. Virtual and global networking is an extremely important part of today’s practice of social movements worldwide and of international resistance, as well as of international hegemony and oppression. A critique of the political economy of networking is a necessary tool to struggle for spaces of inclusion instead of exclusion, and to counter political and individual strategies to dominate and exploit these spaces.
2. Virtual and global networking is a production. It produces huge value, both practical value and exchange value.
3. The practical value of virtual and global networking is obvious. Exchange of information, mutual learning, collective production of theory and practice are only some aspects of this practical value. Networking can support and shelter people and organisations, e.g. through international recognition and campaigning against prosecution of people and organisations by statal power and other violent forces. It also produces social value – communities, inclusion where people might be locally isolated, social knowledge about the development of social structures and ethics.
4. The exchange value of virtual and global networking is less obvious and often hidden, even a blind spot or taboo. To understand the exchange value that is produced in networking, we may use the categories that came handy through the debates about 'immaterial labour' and through the work of Pierre Bourdieu, who introduced the notion of seemingly 'moneyless' forms of value, like 'cultural value'. I shall use here the term 'symbolic value' for a form of value that is produced by immaterial labour and not measured in forms of money, but can – this is to be shown – be appropriated and capitalized as well.
5. The symbolic value of virtual and global networking consists in recognition, centrality and representation.
6. Recognition means that others positively acknowledge what you do, that you 'get a name' by it, that you are seen as a person, group, movement, organisation that does important work and shows relevant skills. (The notion of the internet as a place of 'recognition economy' has been used before. I owe a lot of these ideas to the essay of Francis Hunger, 'Computer als Männermaschine', and his creative use of the work of Pierre Bourdieu and Roswitha Scholtz.) In the internet, recognition value e.g. may be measured in links that go to this site.
7. Centrality means that others may find you, that you control a space or structure that is visited by a lot of people, that you are a person, group, movement, organisation that is popular. In the internet, centrality value e.g. may be measured in hits that are counted on this site.
8. Representation means that others treat you as 'the address' if they are interested in a certain movement or group, field of practice or theory, that they imagine you as a person, group, movement, organisation that represents something bigger. In the internet, representation value e.g. may be measured in findings by seek machines when asked for a certain movement or group, field of practice or theory.
9. Symbolic value follows the same pattern as material value. It can be subject to collective control or to privatisation, it can be exchanged, appropriated, it can be subject to exploitation and capitalisation. It can even be traded into material value. This is the most visible aspect of symbolic value. For example, someone who ran an important website, represented an interesting group or field of activity, got identified with the skills demonstrated by this network, may trade this into a well-payed, regular job or contract within the commercial sector. A person or group may also use the symbolic capital that is owned by it to apply for fundings, to get payed lectures or invitations, etc.
10. The question of collective control vs. privatisation, in terms of symbolic value, is also the question of power inside the network. Power structures inside networks are based on ownership and on dependency.
11. Ownership in virtual networking is gained through the registration of the domain name. Whoever owns the domain name, is holding the ultimate legal power over the site. This cannot be taken away. But for a full sense of ownership, administration rights are necessary. In case of conflict, the administer of the site could not claim the domain, but he or she could, by quick action, move or mirror the content of the site. The site’s content represents the accumulated collective material value of the network – not its present, but its past; not all of its symbolic value, but its archives and thereby some vital part of it. The third factor, ownership and control of the physical server, is usually less important, but may (in case of conflict) be a source of interference and obstruction as well.
12. Power structures and exploitation of symbolic value inside networks is also done through the policy of intellectual property rights. Many domain-owner or funding institutions claim the unlimited property rights on content that is produced (have a look at your contracts!). Often organisations and institutions are even forced or at least urged by the rules of public funding to act that way: invested money has to result in symbolic capital. The GPL (general public licence) is an important tool to be used against this and should be established as some kind of a standard in virtual networking. On the other hand, freedom of intellectual property rights may also be a trap: whatever content a network has accumulated, it can no more be withdrawn from it, even if this network loses its credibility among certain groups – you may leave, but you can’t take it with you.
13. Free Software is a must in virtual and global networking. Open source codes make sure that privatisation is avoided and that you do not have to face the situation that you suddenly have to pay for services you first could use for free. Free software is a necessity for sustainable network structures that do not falter and crumble as soon as initial funding is ended. But free is not just free. Many programs are open source, but are so complicated in installation and use that you are in need of specially adapted 'business solutions' - for which you either have to pay a lot of money or step into long-term dependency from a single person, a small group of developers or a commercial entity. This is one more good reason for the principle: keep it low – a network shouldn’t use software that is more complex that what really matches its needs; and you should rely on existing software that is already in use by a lot of people, so that you are capable to replace your technician if needed. Avoid programming, if you can!
14. Dependency in virtual networking is gained through control/ownership of central resources, through uneven distribution of capacities, through personal identification and 'self-branding', and through the absence of self-organisation and solidarity among network members.
15. The last aspect is quite crucial. The re-masculinisation of many virtual and global network projects, in my view, is mainly due to this fact. There are a lot of factors that contribute to keeping the internet a man’s world, of course. But today, the combined and solidary action of women inside a network, taken to the point to step out collectively and leave the network if certain changes are not made, certain practices not altered etc. – should be a strong bargaining power to push these changes. The open re-masculinisation of a networking projects immediately drops its symbolic value – its representational, recognitional, centrality-related value falls if it is clear that this is a place of men only. While the hidden, soft, individualized, step-by-step re-masculinisation does not affect this value so much, the open does – expecially if it is taken up by solidary action of women in other networks and organsations, affecting the relationship towards the so-branded network. It is the isolation and the lack of grouping inside networks that affects the bargaining power of specially oppressed groups inside networks most.
16. Also in non-virtual, local/regional networking and organising, the inclusion of women, migrants, social minorities, opposing fractions etc. is based on their bargaining power, gained through grouping together and solidarity, so that loosing this group or minority as a collective would lessen the symbolic value of the network or organisation. But in virtual, global networks, this bargaining power tends to be eliminated just because of the openness and globality of the structure: there will always be someone other to replace you, maybe facing later the same problems and quitting, but him- or herself being immediately replaced by others. Usually, it is easier in face-to-face-meetings to act solidarically and collectively. So in virtual and global networking, there has to be much more care for sub-structures and horizontal communication, to avoid this fact of individualisation, isolation and powerlessness for non-hegemonic groups and for minorities.
17. Viable counter-strategies against the exploitation and personal/institutional accumulation of symbolic value in networking are:
Separation of domain ownership and administration
multi-administrational structures (many programms allow this)
the funding organisation should not own the domain
the physical hosting should be chosen carefully, best at politically trustful projects and organisations
control of representation towards outside: do not let one person do it all
control of inside capacity building: do not let a small group alone run the network, build a too-strong in-group, run most of the discussions etc.
structures of solidarity and self-organisation inside networks: structures of representation for women, migrants, minorities
'forky' structures: possibility to easily set up special threads, parts, co-mailingslists etc. for closer communication and self-organisation, e.g. for the named groups.
18. There is a need for technical support and technological development to strenghten these counter-strategies:
Support through easy, cheap and guided hosting for political and social groups and networks
Support through offers of consultation in the field of websites, network software, CMS, Wikis etc.
Development of programs that allow not only a personal multiplication, but a real decentralisation of administrative rights within one platform, so that networks can easily use this platform but control their space quite fully, and groups within them can do this as well on a smaller level.
19. There are a lot of factors that are expecially dangerous in networking among grassroots and left organisations and groups. Ideologies like 'nobody here earns money from it, all is done for free, we have an ethics of our own' etc. may work as a veil drawn before the actual power structures. Do not buy this! It is more difficult, and even more important, to keep an eye on the political economy of networking inside our own structures. Trust no one. Do not think: 'With the next admin, things will be brighter.' Be aware. Build rackets. Go get organized.
1. Virtual and global networking is an extremely important part of today’s practice of social movements worldwide and of international resistance, as well as of international hegemony and oppression. A critique of the political economy of networking is a necessary tool to struggle for spaces of inclusion instead of exclusion, and to counter political and individual strategies to dominate and exploit these spaces.
2. Virtual and global networking is a production. It produces huge value, both practical value and exchange value.
3. The practical value of virtual and global networking is obvious. Exchange of information, mutual learning, collective production of theory and practice are only some aspects of this practical value. Networking can support and shelter people and organisations, e.g. through international recognition and campaigning against prosecution of people and organisations by statal power and other violent forces. It also produces social value – communities, inclusion where people might be locally isolated, social knowledge about the development of social structures and ethics.
4. The exchange value of virtual and global networking is less obvious and often hidden, even a blind spot or taboo. To understand the exchange value that is produced in networking, we may use the categories that came handy through the debates about 'immaterial labour' and through the work of Pierre Bourdieu, who introduced the notion of seemingly 'moneyless' forms of value, like 'cultural value'. I shall use here the term 'symbolic value' for a form of value that is produced by immaterial labour and not measured in forms of money, but can – this is to be shown – be appropriated and capitalized as well.
5. The symbolic value of virtual and global networking consists in recognition, centrality and representation.
6. Recognition means that others positively acknowledge what you do, that you 'get a name' by it, that you are seen as a person, group, movement, organisation that does important work and shows relevant skills. (The notion of the internet as a place of 'recognition economy' has been used before. I owe a lot of these ideas to the essay of Francis Hunger, 'Computer als Männermaschine', and his creative use of the work of Pierre Bourdieu and Roswitha Scholtz.) In the internet, recognition value e.g. may be measured in links that go to this site.
7. Centrality means that others may find you, that you control a space or structure that is visited by a lot of people, that you are a person, group, movement, organisation that is popular. In the internet, centrality value e.g. may be measured in hits that are counted on this site.
8. Representation means that others treat you as 'the address' if they are interested in a certain movement or group, field of practice or theory, that they imagine you as a person, group, movement, organisation that represents something bigger. In the internet, representation value e.g. may be measured in findings by seek machines when asked for a certain movement or group, field of practice or theory.
9. Symbolic value follows the same pattern as material value. It can be subject to collective control or to privatisation, it can be exchanged, appropriated, it can be subject to exploitation and capitalisation. It can even be traded into material value. This is the most visible aspect of symbolic value. For example, someone who ran an important website, represented an interesting group or field of activity, got identified with the skills demonstrated by this network, may trade this into a well-payed, regular job or contract within the commercial sector. A person or group may also use the symbolic capital that is owned by it to apply for fundings, to get payed lectures or invitations, etc.
10. The question of collective control vs. privatisation, in terms of symbolic value, is also the question of power inside the network. Power structures inside networks are based on ownership and on dependency.
11. Ownership in virtual networking is gained through the registration of the domain name. Whoever owns the domain name, is holding the ultimate legal power over the site. This cannot be taken away. But for a full sense of ownership, administration rights are necessary. In case of conflict, the administer of the site could not claim the domain, but he or she could, by quick action, move or mirror the content of the site. The site’s content represents the accumulated collective material value of the network – not its present, but its past; not all of its symbolic value, but its archives and thereby some vital part of it. The third factor, ownership and control of the physical server, is usually less important, but may (in case of conflict) be a source of interference and obstruction as well.
12. Power structures and exploitation of symbolic value inside networks is also done through the policy of intellectual property rights. Many domain-owner or funding institutions claim the unlimited property rights on content that is produced (have a look at your contracts!). Often organisations and institutions are even forced or at least urged by the rules of public funding to act that way: invested money has to result in symbolic capital. The GPL (general public licence) is an important tool to be used against this and should be established as some kind of a standard in virtual networking. On the other hand, freedom of intellectual property rights may also be a trap: whatever content a network has accumulated, it can no more be withdrawn from it, even if this network loses its credibility among certain groups – you may leave, but you can’t take it with you.
13. Free Software is a must in virtual and global networking. Open source codes make sure that privatisation is avoided and that you do not have to face the situation that you suddenly have to pay for services you first could use for free. Free software is a necessity for sustainable network structures that do not falter and crumble as soon as initial funding is ended. But free is not just free. Many programs are open source, but are so complicated in installation and use that you are in need of specially adapted 'business solutions' - for which you either have to pay a lot of money or step into long-term dependency from a single person, a small group of developers or a commercial entity. This is one more good reason for the principle: keep it low – a network shouldn’t use software that is more complex that what really matches its needs; and you should rely on existing software that is already in use by a lot of people, so that you are capable to replace your technician if needed. Avoid programming, if you can!
14. Dependency in virtual networking is gained through control/ownership of central resources, through uneven distribution of capacities, through personal identification and 'self-branding', and through the absence of self-organisation and solidarity among network members.
15. The last aspect is quite crucial. The re-masculinisation of many virtual and global network projects, in my view, is mainly due to this fact. There are a lot of factors that contribute to keeping the internet a man’s world, of course. But today, the combined and solidary action of women inside a network, taken to the point to step out collectively and leave the network if certain changes are not made, certain practices not altered etc. – should be a strong bargaining power to push these changes. The open re-masculinisation of a networking projects immediately drops its symbolic value – its representational, recognitional, centrality-related value falls if it is clear that this is a place of men only. While the hidden, soft, individualized, step-by-step re-masculinisation does not affect this value so much, the open does – expecially if it is taken up by solidary action of women in other networks and organsations, affecting the relationship towards the so-branded network. It is the isolation and the lack of grouping inside networks that affects the bargaining power of specially oppressed groups inside networks most.
16. Also in non-virtual, local/regional networking and organising, the inclusion of women, migrants, social minorities, opposing fractions etc. is based on their bargaining power, gained through grouping together and solidarity, so that loosing this group or minority as a collective would lessen the symbolic value of the network or organisation. But in virtual, global networks, this bargaining power tends to be eliminated just because of the openness and globality of the structure: there will always be someone other to replace you, maybe facing later the same problems and quitting, but him- or herself being immediately replaced by others. Usually, it is easier in face-to-face-meetings to act solidarically and collectively. So in virtual and global networking, there has to be much more care for sub-structures and horizontal communication, to avoid this fact of individualisation, isolation and powerlessness for non-hegemonic groups and for minorities.
17. Viable counter-strategies against the exploitation and personal/institutional accumulation of symbolic value in networking are:
Separation of domain ownership and administration
multi-administrational structures (many programms allow this)
the funding organisation should not own the domain
the physical hosting should be chosen carefully, best at politically trustful projects and organisations
control of representation towards outside: do not let one person do it all
control of inside capacity building: do not let a small group alone run the network, build a too-strong in-group, run most of the discussions etc.
structures of solidarity and self-organisation inside networks: structures of representation for women, migrants, minorities
'forky' structures: possibility to easily set up special threads, parts, co-mailingslists etc. for closer communication and self-organisation, e.g. for the named groups.
18. There is a need for technical support and technological development to strenghten these counter-strategies:
Support through easy, cheap and guided hosting for political and social groups and networks
Support through offers of consultation in the field of websites, network software, CMS, Wikis etc.
Development of programs that allow not only a personal multiplication, but a real decentralisation of administrative rights within one platform, so that networks can easily use this platform but control their space quite fully, and groups within them can do this as well on a smaller level.
19. There are a lot of factors that are expecially dangerous in networking among grassroots and left organisations and groups. Ideologies like 'nobody here earns money from it, all is done for free, we have an ethics of our own' etc. may work as a veil drawn before the actual power structures. Do not buy this! It is more difficult, and even more important, to keep an eye on the political economy of networking inside our own structures. Trust no one. Do not think: 'With the next admin, things will be brighter.' Be aware. Build rackets. Go get organized.