Advertisement

Economics, the Network Society, and the Ontology of Violence

  • Steven L. ArxerEmail author
Chapter
Part of the International Perspectives on Social Policy, Administration, and Practice book series (IPSPAP)

Abstract

The notion of a network society was popularized in the 1980s with the rise of novel information and computer technologies. According to Castells, a network society is one “whose social structure is made of networks powered by microelectronics-based information and communication technologies.” The explosive growth of the Internet, mobile devices, and microprocessors over the past several decades has helped to make the term “network” commonplace. In addition to media systems, workplaces and even familial relations are now commonly described as having the character of networks. This imagery is propelled further by economic, political, and migratory flows within a more globalized world. This network imagery suggests that institutions, practices, and relationships are structured on a new social model, and various monikers, such as lattice, matrix, system, and web, have been used to describe this emerging social formation. All of these metaphors intend to highlight new social conditions of decentralization, flexibility, and interconnectivity that characterize twenty-first-century society. Networks, in particular, are thought to offer an alternative to traditional, “centered” models of social order. Yet, in ways that are increasingly evident, this network imagery actually justifies the violence of global market relations. Despite its popularity and conceptual development, less attention has been paid to unraveling the ontology of the network society. In particular, basic assumptions about the nature of individuals, social organization, economies, and ethics are not necessarily forthcoming in conceptual descriptions of the network society. Investigating the ontological assumptions implied by network imagery is important because such analyses alert us to remaining challenges on the path to an open society.

Keywords

Neoliberalism Violence Information Age Network society Symbolic violence Assimilation 

References

  1. Adorno, T. W. (1983). Against epistemology: A metacritique. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  2. Arxer, S. L., Van Lear, W., & Lodge, P. (2011). The Keynesian revolution: Market rationality and socially sensitive economics. New York: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Barney, D. (2004). The network society. UK: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  4. Bourdieu, P. (1990). In other words, Essays towards a reflexive sociology (Translated by M. Adamson). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. J. D. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  6. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  7. Castells, M. (1998). End of millenium. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  8. Castells, M. (2004). The network society: A cross-cultural perspective. Northampton: Edward Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dreyfus, H., & Dreyfus, S. E. (1986). Mind over machine. New York: M. E. Sharpe.Google Scholar
  10. Durkheim, E. (1974). Sociology and philosophy. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  11. Foucault, M. (1973). The birth of the clinic. New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  12. Frankl, V. E. (1969). The will to meaning: Foundations and applications of logotherapy. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
  13. Fromm, E. (2000). Marx’s concept of man. New York: Continuum.Google Scholar
  14. Guattari, F. (1984). Molecular revolutions. Middlesex: Penguin.Google Scholar
  15. Habermas, J. (1975). Legitimation crisis. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
  16. Hayek, F. (1944). The road to serfdom. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hernstein Smilth, B. (1988). Contingencies of value: Alternative perspectives for critical theory. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Luhmann, N. (1982). The differentiation of society. New York: Colombia University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Moody, H. R. (2001). Productive aging and the ideology of old age. In N. Morrow-Howell, J. Hinterlong, & M. Sherraden (Eds.), Productive aging: Concepts and challenges. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Murphy, J. W. (1989). Postmodern social analysis and criticism. Westport: Greenwood Press.Google Scholar
  21. Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  22. Porat, M. U. (1977). The information economy: Definition and measurement (Vol. 1). Washington, DC: US Department of Commerce/Office of Telecommunications.Google Scholar
  23. Ramsay, M. (1997). What’s wrong with liberalism? A radical critique of liberal political philosophy. New York: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Schackle, G. L. S. (1972). Epistemics and economics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Taylor, B. A., & Bengtson, V. L. (2001). Sociological perspectives on productive aging. In N. Morrow-Howell, J. Hinterlong, & M. Sherraden (Eds.), Productive aging concepts and challenges. Baltimore: John Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Weber, M. (1958). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism (Translated by Talcott Parsons). New York: Scribner’s.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sociology & Psychology DepartmentUniversity of North Texas at DallasDallasUSA

Personalised recommendations