BLOG #9

BLOG #9

“This clash between flows and places has consequences for the nation state. Sovereignty is ceded both upwards to the space of flows and downwards to regional and communal groups. States are caught in a bind. If they represent the identities of the communities within them, they isolate themselves from the network. If they obey the network logic, they cease to represent their populations; they become nodes in the network and surrender their sovereignty: “[n]ation states will survive, but not so their sovereignty” (Castells in Nyíri, p. 8)”

While reading this quote and the overall review by Glass of Manuel Castells’ Network Society it came to mind two particular aspects of our culture today, politically and economically. First, when Castells talks about the relationship between flows and places as a consequence of this network and that made me think of how corporations today depend upon foreign labor in order to advance their products, services and overall profit. Specifically it made me think of Apple and how iPhones are manufactured in China. In the United States the loss of jobs is not just a result of immigration into the country, or technological advancement but also of foreign labor that is much convenient for corporations abroad. In the case of China, Apple is able to find skilled workers and pay them at a lower rate than that of an American scenario. So when he refers to this clash between flows and places in relation to sovereignty, a result of globalization is the connectivity that exists between producers and consumers and even further the ability that exists to access such goods and services. With that come some consequences and is that while an American corporation like Apple strive, American jobs are being substituted with foreign labor which is good and bad in itself, because the success of Apple helps the economy but losing jobs also does in terms of numbers and optics.

Another aspect of this quote that is worth considering is the relationship of cause and effect that Castells describe at the end when he says that while the openness to this network creates opportunities and are consequential for the growth of any society, a possible result of that is the surrender of the identity of that nation state or more specifically their sovereignty. This made me think of Trump politics and the power behind protectionism. One of the major ideas against globalization is that while it helps revolutionized domestic economies, it also dismantles cultural identities because the interconnectivity among members and/or the interchange of goods and services from different localities sucks the air of the domestic identity or authority. Trump blames globalization because it has diminished the greatness of America but what is the alternative, if the U.S. government does as Castells says to isolate from the network than they are representing entirely the identity of their community (American people) but if they obey this “logic” then they lose authority. The question is which way to go or can middle ground be found? That question is a persistent challenge with how many anti-globalization stances have being taken in west but technology, the economy and immigration are pushing for greater connectivity.