According to Kelly, this new type of rationality, based on decentralization and self-regulation, is so innovative, revolutionary, and unintuitive that for the uninitiated, the working of the network may sometimes have the semblance of irrationality. For example, “Your [electronic] mail may go to Timbuktu and back on its way across town. A centralized switching system would never direct messages in such a wasteful manner. But the inefficiencies of individual parts is overcome by the incredible reliability of the system as a whole” (16). The network may look irrational, wasteful, and chaotic, but Kelly reassures—as we will further see—that these are in fact the very symptoms of a healthy and vibrant network and represent a new, superior form of rationality.
If decentralization is the path to building a society based on spontaneous order, what is the role of centralization and hierarchy in the network society? Kelly is no anarchist, and he certainly does not go as far as calling for the outright toppling of any form of central planning and governance. But the network, he insists, needs only “minimal governance” (18). Kelly, therefore, suggests focusing on the new territory of networks, arguing that “at present, there is far more to be gained by pushing the boundaries of what can be done by the bottom than by focusing on what can be done at the top” (18). The potentialities of a top-centralized governance have been historically exhausted, and it is therefore no longer a viable path for change. Progress can only come from exploring and tapping into the “bottom” option.
Chaos and Progress
So far, I have explored the underlying technologistic arguments of the digital discourse regarding the emergence of a new rationality, which is the result of the interconnection of disparate nodes. I have also pointed out some of the social implications of such rationality. But the full force of the argument—and from the point of view of this book, where the hegemonic dimension of the digital discourse comes into light—comes when Wired switches from discussing technological, biological, and small-scale organizational scenarios to a discussion of the network economy as a whole. After all, the incentive for the technological discussion in Wired is ultimately to unravel its social consequences. As Kelly puts it, “The internet model has many lessons for the new economy” (16). As I said above, in the digital discourse, network technology is seen not only as a material basis for contemporary economy but also as its metaphor.
Network Market
55