Jeff Jarvis has some interesting thoughts on Google's new role in global affairs.
Here is my response:
The Internet has enough diverse interests and players that it demands governance. No traditional state is in the position or willing to assume that role. So Google governs the Internet.
One could read this showdown (as I do) as a classic international power conflict between a major traditional state and a new, virtual state: the Googlenet.
Google is taking a risky stand to defend the Internet generally. This is what a weaker, threatened state would do.
RSS Feed
Comments (1)
Semantics are important here and a big problem with these concerns and arguments about Google are the result of using terms like state and nation loosely and then contorting them into utterly new non-sensical uses.
For Google to be a state requires a wholly new definition of the state. This new definition don't comport with the reality of what a state does in the real world. A state, strictly speaking, is a sovereign political entity. It can only function if it has a territorial monopoly on taxation, violence and any and all appeals for justice. Google can't be a state or even a virtual state since it can do none of the above. Functionally, Google is no different than any other private actor.
After butchering the concept of state Jarvis goes on to say that, "interest-states will gain more power and that power will come from nations" Please define nation again. Nations are groups of people who share a common religious, ethnic, racial, language, or experience. A state can exist without a nation and a nation can also exist without a state. One is not required for the other. How is a nation going to help the fantastical "interest-state"? Google, Google-philes and Google-advocates actually bear more the hallmarks of a nation than a state.
The internet, on the other hand, at it's most basic functional level is hardware within various states. Trunks and routers run through states. States can and do control what is on their part of the internet, when they so choose. The internet is already governed by the states of the world.
Understanding Google and the internet that way, why would anyone want to restrict the actions of a private actor or even a nation against the depradations of the state?