14.04.2015 Views

The Exploit: A Theory of Networks - asounder

The Exploit: A Theory of Networks - asounder

The Exploit: A Theory of Networks - asounder

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

16 Prolegomenon<br />

and activist uses <strong>of</strong> mobile communications, hacking, and virtual<br />

sit - ins.<br />

In this way, we should point out that the liberation rhetoric <strong>of</strong> distributed<br />

networks, a rhetoric famously articulated by Hans Magnus<br />

Enzensberger in his writings on the emancipation <strong>of</strong> media, is a foil<br />

for the real workings <strong>of</strong> power today. <strong>The</strong> rhetoric <strong>of</strong> liberation is<br />

also a foil for the real nature <strong>of</strong> threats. Whereas in former times,<br />

during the late modern era <strong>of</strong> the Cold War, for example, connectivity<br />

served to deaden the threat <strong>of</strong> weaponry and other forms <strong>of</strong><br />

conflict—open up channels <strong>of</strong> communication with the Soviets, engage<br />

with China—today connectivity functions in exactly the opposite<br />

way.<br />

Connectivity is a threat. <strong>The</strong> network is a weapons system.<br />

<strong>The</strong> U.S. military classifies networks as weapons systems, mobilizing<br />

them as one would a tank or a missile. Today connectivity is a<br />

weapon. Bomb threats and terror alerts inject intangible anxiety into<br />

the population just as a real bomb might do. Media networks propagate<br />

messages from terrorists to all corners <strong>of</strong> the globe, just as airline<br />

networks propagate infectious diseases. <strong>The</strong> U.S. Department <strong>of</strong> Homeland<br />

Security is a reluctant proxy for al - Qaeda communiqués. Without<br />

connectivity, terrorism would not exist in its current form. It would<br />

be called something else—perhaps “revolt,” “sedition,” “murder,” “treason,”<br />

“assassination,” or, as it was called during the period <strong>of</strong> the two<br />

world wars, “sabotage.” Terrorism is quite at home in the age <strong>of</strong> distributed<br />

networks.<br />

In this sense, the West created terrorism during the postmodern era, or<br />

at least created the conditions <strong>of</strong> possibility for terrorism to emerge.<br />

Certainly the use <strong>of</strong> terror in ideological struggles predates postmodernity<br />

by decades if not centuries, and it is certainly not the<br />

West’s conscious intent to bring terrorism into existence. So when<br />

we say the West invented terrorism, we mean this in the structural<br />

sense, not in the flimsy political sense <strong>of</strong> CIA “blowback,” political<br />

resentment, or what have you. We mean that the West created ter-

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!