network urbanism - globalization

Recently, I have read two books that I would seriously recommend: Splintering Urbanism (Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin) and The Writing On the Wall (Will Hutton). Both deal in a way with globalization, the former particularly in relationship with network society, the second focusing on China's relationship with the west, and what actually is the foundation of the west's success (hint: not only capitalism).

The thing that really binds the two books together is the analysis of the balance between state, market, and civil society (or public domain). Liberalism has indeed proven its superiority over authoritarian systems, but liberalism is not only defended by the free market and capitalism, but equally by the public institutions that form the mediating ground between the three. Hutton refers to these institutions as enlightenment institutions, which I am not entirely sure is a great description, but nevertheless their importance is paramount. Equality, if not of being then certainly of possibility, is a prerequisite for our society, and for the postmodern society that I predict and hope we are heading into. In my eyes, globalization holds an infinitely larger positive potential than negative, but it is true that the better world will not come without the efforts and struggles of individuals (whom we always depend on, in the end).

Splintering Urbanism is a book that tries to bring a vast field of subjects dealing with the same thing (network society) together: sociology, engineering, urbanism, architecture, political sciences, economics... To my knowledge it is probably the first comprehensive book dealing with these issues, and to my great pleasure Rem Koolhaas is a frequent reference. The Metropolis has eaten the City...

It is an eye-opener when you are exposed to the enormousnesses of our dependency on different networks, for the distribution of water, electricity, information, goods, food, people... And fascinating how little relevance they are given in contemporary analysis, all these networks always seem to be analysed separately, or as secondary to our great humanist interaction.

In the end, it all comes down to the following paradox: The postmodern society with its layering, plurality, individuality and endless possibilities, also poses a threat to equality. How will we deal with the effects of disenfranchisement that follow? In the wake of deregulation and liberalisation, what guarantees the minimum level for those that cannot pay?

The greatest possibility of our times is also its greatest challenge.