The authors propose an alternative vision of a network society, which emphasizes pluralism, inter-coordination, fluid recombination, and participatory governance. They argue that the true potential of networks lies in their capacity to represent intersectional affiliations and enable accountability for diverse identities. They also highlight the need for local empowerment and global coordination to address challenges like climate change and pandemics. The authors conclude that while Srinivasan's book poses crucial questions about the role of networks in our political and social systems, its answers are insufficient and undermine the networks it seeks to leverage.
Key takeaways:
- Balaji Srinivasan's book, _The Network State_ (TNS), proposes a new social contract enabled by “Web3 technology,” centered on blockchains. He defines the network state (NS) as a startup country—“a highly aligned online community with a capacity for collective action that crowdfunds territory around the world and eventually gains diplomatic recognition from pre-existing states.”
- Srinivasan's vision of network states is criticized for being backwards-looking and for preserving ideological alignment, rendering voice in democracy unnecessary. The assumption is that those unhappy with the dictats of one feudal lord would simply find another.
- The authors argue that many of our biggest problems are in the world of atoms, not in the world of bits. They suggest empowering groups within and across countries to address the pressing problems they face, build legitimacy and win public support to force their many governments to the table to grapple with their creative solutions.
- While Srinivasan sees networks as a tool to establish a new order that doesn't require them, the authors see networks at the core of imagining and thriving in a network society. They propose a future of pluralism, inter-coordination, fluid recombination, and participatory governance.