Will We Be Ever Able To Go Off-grid Again? And Other Questions about the Electronic Silk Road

Will we ever be able to go off-grid again? What do we gain and lose if not? These questions came to mind as I was reading Anupam Chander’s Electronic Silk Road. The book is excellent. Indeed, these questions and the rest of this post’s ideas would not have come to mind had he not set out how the Electronic Silk Road operates and might operate. And my questions are perhaps prompted by a good book that addresses much and better still opens the doors to the next questions. Chander makes a strong case for benefits of a modern silk road where trust and trade work together and promote “net-work” which he defines as “information services delivered remotely through electronic communications systems.” This two way world facilitates labor shifted to Asia but also Google and Facebook spanning the globe with their services. His plea for new laws to address this change in trade makes sense. Our world of goods is fading to a world of digital things. Yet I wonder whether this new rule of trade maps to all the wonders we may want.

There may be unintentional irony here. Chapter One epigraph quotes Keynes “What an extraordinary episode in the economic progress of man that age was which came to an end in August, 1914!” Does trade stop war or at least make countries less likely to war against each other? Maybe. To get there Chander points out that, “the characteristics that permit net-work trade might be deployed to create a robust infrastructure for such trade: real-time information transfer, low information and other transactions costs, the ability of individuals around the world to collaborate, and electronic identification.” But the same systems that may promote trade can lead to greater surveillance and repression.

In other words, the recent spying amongst countries may be a good thing. I fear greater coordination amongst countries rather than friction. Chander calls this issue “Stalinization—the imposition of the world’s most repressive rules on cyberspace, in aggregated form.” He acknowledges this point at p. 197. Nonetheless this greater connection and improved grid may be inescapable. The idea that local laws must balance global over-reach does not appear to address what happens when the big boys agree. The electronic silk road thus seems to kill the romance of the silk road.

The Silk Road evokes adventure, the ability to test, change identities, and yet somehow trade worked. Failure on the Silk Road or even mistakes or cheating could be hidden by moving from the Road to some other country. In that sense, a modern system of trade on a global scale seems to defeat the room for play that Julie Cohen has described in Configuring the Networked Self. To where would one go to experiment, reinvent, and rehabilitate? Even with greater freedom to communicate things can go awry. A WTO response may be futile if all agree on bad behavior. Public shaming of corporations may mean little when they are forced to comply. To be clear, I agree with much of what Chander offers and have hope that the mitigation he offers will take it root. At bottom it may be a faith that discourse and debate defeats evil in all forms. Part of me thinks this idea is true. Part wonders whether we have come that far from the days leading up to World War I or II. If not, tighter understanding and trade may do less than both Chander and I hope. Then again Chander may be setting us up for the next step in his ideas. I certainly hope so.

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Adele says:

    Interesting post, Deven; I have been curious about the implications of a growing electronic Silk Road with all the talk about it as of late. On the surface, greater global connectivity seems very beneficial to people as a whole. New trading opportunities and dialogue between different people becomes much more available to those with access to the tech needed. But your idea of an “inescapable” grid also poses an issue for those that may abuse or misunderstand the use of digital technology and information. Though you can’t actually pick up and move off the grid, I feel the silk road will offer solutions in itself to help “hide” those that want/need it. Either by erasing your presence or burying it in massive amounts of information that make it neigh impossible to find, I think services will pop up in the digital world that will monetize this need. I’m sure there are already examples of this budding today, though I don’t know of any.
    If possible, would you mind explaining further the idea of spying to be a good thing? I think I am getting the basic concept, but I would like to make sure.

  2. Deven Desai says:

    Quick answer, the spying on each other suggests a less than cozy world. The friction may mean that the chance for all to agree let’s spy together on citizens is low. One possible outcome may be a behind the scenes swap of information about citizens in exchange for not spying on government folks. That would be the sort of coordination I’d distrust and not be happy to see.

  3. CraigM. says:

    I guess it’s nice having the off grid. No more, no less. that’s all