The Return of the State?

Abstract

Massive government-financed rescue operations for banking and insurance industries in the United States and in Europe, seeking to contain the financial crisis that culminated in 2008, amounted to ‘the biggest, broadest and fastest government response in history.’1This ‘great stabilisation,’ asThe Economistcalled it, resulting in ‘quasi’ or ‘shadow nationalization,’2cast doubt on the notion, fashionable at the height of the neoliberal wave, that the state was essentially on its way out, as many of its tasks and responsibilities were oozing steadily and irreversibly toward the market. The state and, by the same token, the political seemed back – with a vengeance, triggering solemn announcements of ‘the return of the state’ and ‘the end of the ideology of public powerlessness.’3Observers concurred. ‘Free-market capitalism, globalization, and deregulation’ had been ‘rising across the globe for 30 years,’ yet that era now had ended: ‘Global economic and financial integration are reversing. The role of the state, together with financial and trade protectionism, is ascending.’4Triggering a perceived ‘paradigm shift towards a more European, a more social state,’ even in the United States and in China, the crisis was seen to herald a move ‘back towards a mixed economy.’5The question, meanwhile, remained: had the state indeed withdrawn as much during the neoliberal era as is often assumed?

Digital Transnational Dissidence and State Control: A Conceptual Reflection on the Practice and Limits of Digital Transnationalism

“…This volatility is also the reason such a transformation spurred the state to maintain its control on the flow of people, information, ideas and influences, by reinstating the confining character of borders surrounding the homeland. This confirms the return of the state arguments (Barrow, 2005;Delwaide, 2011). Nevertheless, concomitant with the increasing emancipation the internet and communication technologies provided to humanity, states today are keener to seek new opportunities to increase their control over how people communicate and interact, both nationally and cross-nationally.…”

“…In return, it urges governments to take measures to maintain control on the digital (thus the transnational) flow of information, ideas and influences. Governmental involvement in this regardincluding huge political, legal and economic influence the states pose on the digital space and the increase in governmental appearance on it-confirm the return of the state arguments (Barrow, 2005;Delwaide, 2011). States are better adapted to globalisation today, and thus have learnt how to deal with the emancipation the internet and communication technologies provided to humanity.…”