the (online) square & the tower
networks, hierarchies, and a digital panopticon
This is essay 6 of 7 essays for The Tech Progressive Writing Challenge. Join the conversation in the build_ Discord.
With all the talk of centralised vs decentralised society, my historian brain couldn’t help but reflect whether this is unique to the 21st century (and emergent technologies) or whether it represents a common trend over time.
My belief is that while there has been historical debate between centralisation and decentralisation regarding government & economics, this is the first period in history that we’ve ever deeply considered decentralised models for business & trade. It is also the first time in history where the trade-off between centralisation and decentralisation could have immense consequences.
If decentralisation is unsuccessful, then centralisation will be the only option. Hierarchies would have the technological wherewithawal to control the information we consume (social media) and view the transactions we make (CBDCs).
The battle between centralisation and decentralisation is not new
The historian, Niall Ferguson, argues in his book “The Square and the Tower: Networks, Hierarchies and the Struggle for Global Power” that society oscillates between “hierarchical” and “networked” periods. While he makes some broad generalisations about networks and the impact of peer-groups such as the Illuminati and Freemasons, the idea of a dichotomy between network and hierarchy through time, past and present, is compelling.
The square and the tower themselves represent the two structures within the classic town structure (Ferguson uses the example of the Piazza Del Campo in Siena) and are metaphors for networks and hierarchies respectively:
[we think about hierarchies] as vertically structured organizations characterized by centralized and top-down command, control, and communication…
… far from being the opposite of a network, a hierarchy is just a special kind of network...think of a pure hierarchy as in some sense ‘anti-random’, in that the promiscuous connectivity associated with networks—above all, clustering—is prohibited. (Square & the Tower)
Hierarchical eras represent order and stability, while networked eras represent flexibility, innovation, and chaos.
Ferguson argues tech has enabled networks to thrive through the facilitation of communication. Information is no longer asymmetrical thanks to social media platforms. But Ferguson does not advocate for these platforms, seeing them as a way to control the population, to undermine governments, and to foster extremist ideologies.
The public square is now essentially controlled by a handful of companies...and they can exclude others (Ferguson on CNBC)
In history, hierarchies never had the power to control communication like they do today. As debates continue about their control of modern discourse, there is also the concern that hierarchies may gain more control of the financial system.
Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDC) are increasingly being studied by governments. The Bank of England now has a CBDC taskforce following their 2020 whitepaper, while China has a CBDC that has actively processed ~$10bn in payments. These currencies give the state a full electronic record of an individual’s spending and activity, acting as a digital system of record, unit of account, and medium of exchange.
Hierarchies have never had such opportunity…
The hierarchies in the tower were never able to foment absolute control over the square, even in the totalitarian societies of the 20th century. With the rise of social media platforms and CBDCs, the tower becomes a panopticon. It can see all of our transactions, all of our communication.
If decentralisation is unsuccessful, and deeper centralisation succeeds, then the panopticon will induce a sense of permanent visibility that ensures the functioning of a central power. Let’s hope they’re benevolent.