 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The star and the network, Authority and Civil Society
Transport infrastructures (roads and railways) were already structuring trade in the previous century. In France a radial, star shape had been constructed around Paris whereas in Germany routes were more like a lattice. Nowadays, however the structure no longer appears on a map but equates with an abstract space. This is equally structured whether in a radial, star formation - television and radio where one person is talking to several million listeners or viewers, or as a network - the telephone where each subscriber can communicate with all other subscribers, though s/he only speaks privately to one at a time. There are also intermediary forms such as telematic servers and cable services etc. in between these two extremes.
Television was established prior to the telephone as governments everywhere made sure that the population had television to receive their message but were not in such a hurry to provide telephones as they were as always suspicious about plots being hatched against them by people. Nevertheless, the telephone is the principle tool of the small firm. What is a businessman? He's someone who lifts up his phone to communicate with his clients and his bankers and to get his suppliers to compete with one another.
Therefore the star and the network symbolize authority and civil society respectively.
Tocqueville observed that people were becoming more and more preoccupied by personal and specific concerns and devoted less time to questions of general interest. He deduced from this that authority was weakening and that there would be less wars in the future. History proved him wrong up to the mid 20th century but one now sees appearing the conditions necessary for his prediction to come true. Aggressiveness is shown in a different way now, wars are commercial and regulated as in a tournament by competition rules. Isn't this the stage of the dissolution of the state forecast by Marx? Will bureaucracy dissolve away within the telephone?
If we project the current rate of installation of telephones up to the year 2020, all countries of the world, particularly India and China the most populated (40% of world population between them) will cross the so called "glasnost" threshold (approximately 10 lines per 100 inhabitants) above which no economy can be controlled by a centralized bureaucracy. The result of this is not the global village forecast by Mac Luhan but a multiplicity of delocalized villages made up of professionals in diaspora, and the disintegration of old style authority.
The task here is to base futurology on concrete, commonplace data once again. Social relationships consist of communication and, if the infrastructure alters, then social patterns are redrawn. They are like water, channelled by communication routes.
Railway lines, roads and canals structured the economy in the previous century. In France, they converged on Paris and accentuated centralization while in Germany they were more of a lattice pattern and encouraged development centred around medium sized towns.
The same is true for radio communications but here the pattern cannot be read directly from a map and one has to refer to a more abstract plan, that of a star or a network. The telephone is now so familiar that we have already forgotten what life was like without it. Nevertheless it short circuits the authorities and gives power back to those ready to take it, the entrepreneurs who place themselves in the gaps which others do not see, who exert themselves to process and disseminate information, rather than to those who are content to rest upon their laurels and privileges. Power is there to be grasped and is continually open to challenge.
Machiavelli had previously identified two types of organizations ; one, in his day Turkey, centralized, where everything was dependent on the sovereign ; ministers and administrators were appointed by him and could be instantaneously dismissed by him. It was difficult to seize power but relatively easy to keep once seized because there was a unified response. In the second, decentralized, (at that time France) legitimacy is shared amongst the barons with each attaining a great deal of autonomy. Machiavelli stated that, as a consequence, power could be seized relatively easily, because discontented barons could always be found as allies but was more difficult to preserve as the barons continued to plot even after one had gained power.
This pertinent analysis can be applied to our predictions for the future. The network of communications is bound to create decentralization and the abundance of information flows will mean that operations become physically uncontrollable. In his novel 1984 George Orwell described a police state watching everything through video cameras. However, he slightly misunderstood the theory of graphs. In a decentralized and interconnected society this fantasy is not technically possible, however much the authorities in power desire it. In practice, can one envisage half the population employed listening to the telephone conversations of the other half ? Who would monitor those listening and who would have the time to read the results of these fascinating monitorings ?
For us, the opening up of Eastern European countries was seen as inevitable since the mid 80's. Why? Because even employing force the central authorities could not resist the rise in exchanges. Previously nothing had been possible without their consent, but once communications had been installed, almost everything could happen without them. Power dissolves in civil society, like sugar in water.
France witnessed the spread of television between 1955 and 1975. In one generation it moved from 0% to 80% of households being equipped. Then from 1970 onwards France experienced the generalized installation of telephones. In 1970 there were 4 lines per 100 inhabitants but by 1985 it reached the level of 40 lines per 100 inhabitants, similar to the situation in other developed countries. Now from 1975 onwards, small businesses create jobs. Large firms are stagnating or declining. Furthermore the message of political parties is changing. Right wing parties used to support big businesses and even help them to swallow small firms. They have now become defenders of small firms and of the creation of new businesses. Left wing parties were Jacobites and supported centralized, state control. They now believe in decentralization and defend regional and community initiatives. Both philosophies express the same attitudes, micro initiatives rather than centralized systems, the periphery rather than the centre. This change in discourse is to be expected for as society evolves it is natural for political messages to take account of reality.
The digital network with integrated service (numéris), mobile phones, PDAs (personal digital assistant) and the video phone are now making their appearance. All these tools function in a network and not in a star formation. From 2020-2030 onwards interpersonal communications will be accompanied by images, using either a video phone and a "broad band" system. This does not mean that there will no longer be collective servers and services but that there will be no difference in character between centralized transmissions and decentralized users. Professionals and amateurs will function similarly and micro scale initiatives will become a way of life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|