Af Ib Jørgensen
email: ibj@i4.auc.dk

Jeg er lektor på Aalborg universitets Institut for Samfundsudvikling og Planlægning. Jeg forsker og underviser i bl.a. EU's indflydelse på dansk politik og planlægning I en artikel af J. Kinney i Wired fra 1995 fandt jeg disse meget interessante synspunkter vedrørende sammenhængen mellem kapitalisme og nationalstaternes fremtid. Det er karakteristisk, at de fleste optimistiske betragtninger over fremtidens internet- cyberspace mm samfund i meget ringe grad kan se hvorledes Internettet er en integreret del af den globale kapitalisme. Af anmeldelserne at dømme gælder dette også Tor Nørretranders' nye bog, men her er jeg naturligvis på glatis, da jeg ikke selv har læst den. I relation til debatten om opmærksomhedsøkonomi forekommer det mig en absolut nødvendighed at få bestemt hvorledes en sådan økonomi kan indpasses i kapitalens uomgængelige akkumulationsproces. Her er så klippet fra Kinneys artikel, i hvilken han bringer udtalelser fra en mr. Lawrence Wilkinson: "...the power of virtual mobility is not quite the same as the power of accumulated capital. At the same time that you may be downloading an enormous videoclip of Tonya Harding's weddingnight...multinational corporations are busy conducting transactions worth million of dollars in the blink of an eye......despite originality and political diversity gyrating on the Net, the onrushing logic of the integration of the world economy and world politics into a single unified whole may overshadow these distinctions, just as the boundaries between nations are becoming anachronistic in the face of the 'global marketplace'. When questioned about the future status of nationalism, Lawrence Wilkinson, co-founder of the Net-wise Global Business Network, offers this encapsulation: 'Just as during the Enlightenment 'the nation-state' took over from 'the church' to become the dominant seat of action, so the nation-state is now receding, yielding center stage to 'the marketplace'; the action in the marketplace is, interestingly, everywhere: local, global, wherever. And 'wherever' is increasingly dictated by 'pure' economics and interests, not by national borders (nor the tariffs, national practices, and customs houses that define them).' Is this the end of nationalism? Wilkinson observes: 'I believe that we're in for some nationalist noise and some nationalist violence before the transition is done, but I do believe that it will finish, to be replaced by kinds of tribal and commercial conflicts. What will remain of nationalism? My bet is that it will have the character - the strength and relative weight - of brand loyalty; perhaps in some cases, that charged variety of brand loyalty, a fan's relationship to a sports team.'" Kinney, J. (1995) "Anarcho-Emergentist-Republicans" - Is there a new politics emerging in the Net/cyberspace/digital culture?" WIRED 3.09 Sept. s. 90-95 San Francisco