Power and Networked Social Movements Karine Nahon and Manuel Castells SoMe Lab @karineb @somelabresearch
The goal – dynamics of power The method – eclectic The contribution –a framework of analysis to examine the process of political representation through the lenses of information control and power relationships Lit: Castells, 2009, 2012; Nahon, 2009, 2009, 20011; Mason, 2012; Juris, 2008; Lievrouw, 2011; Earl, 2011,2012;
Code Power - Rules • Rules of representations • Rules of participation
Dynamics – network gatekeeping power • Inclusion/Exclusion • Who is a citizen? • Who is entitled to certain rights? • Prioritize groups that promote the gatekeeper’s interest • Exclusion of groups that risk network-making power • Legislation to bound the power of the judicial system • Switching-making power
Counter Power- Background • Israel – housing crisis, unbearable cost of living • Spain - Financial crisis, high rates of unemployment, housing crisis for the youth and threat to Internet freedom.
Counter Power - The Message • We don’t have a democracy because government is captured by financial interests and personal interests of politicians. • There is a disconnect between network-making power (setting the goals of the democratic network) and the code power (how these goals are achieved, rules of representation). • It is not about the crisis, but about the management of the crisis.
Counter Power - Goals • Both - change political system, reprogram political representation and participation • Israel – achieve “social justice”, • Spain – those responsible for the crisis should pay for it, keep the welfare state, control corruption, replace current corporate media
Demands, Slogans and Leadership • No specific demands. Every possible demand. Real Democracy Now We Are the Government It is not the Crisis, it is the System The People Demand Social Justice
Discussions about the tents movement and the Trachtenberg committee The formal channels of the protesters and the Trachtenberg committee (Gov.)
Outcomes – Consciousness-making • Both - A change of mind of how people think about elementary components of representation and participation (88% in Israel and 75% in Spain in support of the movement) • Spain - consciousness of being a global node
Outcomes – Organization-making • Leaderless • Decision making by assembly • Constant networking in the internet (new forms of organization and participation) • Rhizomaticlogic
Outcomes-Institutions Making • Spain – none • Israel – five areas – housing, tax, social services, cost of living, fiscal policy, and macro economy environment
Conclusions • Relationship between characteristics of the movement and impact on society • The network capacity of the movement • Gatekeepers and Movements
Thanks Karine Nahon and Manuel Castells firstname.lastname@example.org email@example.com