Samizdat.net : a simulacrum of underground resistance?

Castells and the Network Society

Castells describes at length the advent of the network society, the global society we live in now. He explains that it emerged from three main phenomena: 1) the rapid development of information technologies that led to the proliferation of transactions globally and in real time and to countless flows of information, 2) the cultural and social movements of the 60s that questioned traditions, if they did not in fact dissolved them, and 3) the restructuring of capitalism and the state in the 80s that freed capital from restraint.

One of his main arguments is that, within the context of the network society, there is a tension between what he calls the “space of flows” and the “space of places” to the benefit of the “space of flows”.

The space of places is the space in which we live, work and travel. This space is grounded in temporality and physicality. It is the space of real human experience, where social values and cultural traditions are enacted.

In contrast the space of flows refers to the areas created by flows of information. This is a global space, timeless, which, although it is still informed by the situated social values of the global decision-makers to a certain extent, is less and less connected to the localized space of places.

Although Castells considers that the network society has an extraordinary dynamism and has the potential to better our lives, he is also concerned that this society may lead to more inequality, exclusion and crime. In the network society, decisions are usually made at the global level, driven by capitalistic values, namely, economic value, and as a result that society tends to exclude everything and everyone that has no such value.

Moreover, to Castells, the network society calls into question the processes of construction of identity for social actors. This is a source of concern since the notion of identity is at the heart of social demands and desire for social change.

We are currently experiencing new forms of social change because the rules of the games have changed. Two new factors must be taken into account: 1) the disjunction between the notions of global and local, and 2) the separation between power and experience in different time-space frames. These two factors partially explain the tension between the space of flows and the space of places that I mentioned earlier. Furthermore, the way identity is constructed is a matter of social context; it is a situated process. The fact that the space of places (i.e., traditional space of social context) is losing ground in the face of the space of flows begs the question: what new processes will emerge regarding the construction and maintenance of a collective identity?

Castells contends that “civil societies shrink & disarticulate because there is no continuity between the logic of power-making in global networks and the logic of association and representation in specific societies and cultures". [1] What will then take over the role of civil societies?

In an attempt to uncover the processes at work in the construction of identity in the network society, Castells offers the following typology:

Castells is particularly interested in the notion of project identity and he hypothetizes that "subjects, if and when constructed, are no longer built on the basis of civil society, but as a prolongation of communal resistance".[4]

Furthermore, he argues that in the network society, meaning is organized around one primary identity (that frames others), which is self-sustaining across time & space. He defines meaning as the symbolic identification by a social actor of the purpose of his/her action.

In light of Castells’ understanding of the notion of identity in the context of the network society, I propose to explore samizdat.net’s construction of identity. More specifically, I will show that this collective is engaged in the construction of a resistance identity rather than a project identity as it seeks to raise awareness about neo-liberal capitalism. In addition, I will examine the collective’s role and significance within the French society at large. To what extent can this collective effect social change?

In order to do so, there are three components to this study. First, I offer a comparison between the underground samizdat system that was in place in the former Soviet Union and samizdat.net in order to illuminate the identity construction process. Second, I provide an overview of samizdat.net’ activities as well as of the myriad of alternative groups associated to the collective via its web site. This overview gives valuable insights regarding the collective’s significance vis-a-vis French society at large. Finally, I provide a synthesis on samizdat.net’s construction of identity from Castells’ lens.

Samizdat.net and historical Samizdat

The choice of the name, samizdat.net, evidently reflects the values to which this collective abides. It is therefore illuminating to offer a brief account of what Samizdat was in order to better understand the collective’s position, especially regarding: 1) publishing, 2) social consciousness, 3) commercialism, and 4) censorship.

Publishing
Samizdat refers to a system by which censored literature was clandestinely printed and distributed in the Soviet Union and its orbit countries. The term was coined in the late 50s, but the system really spread in the late 60s, after the end of Khrushchev’s rule.

Samizdat literally means self-publishing but its meaning was extended to publishing “not necessarily of my own work, but of my own free will, without begging for permission".[5] Samizdat.net’s perspective on publishing is clearly derived from the former perspective, but also reflects current concerns on issues such as the free circulation of knowledge and copyright. These concerns are explicitly addressed on the web site under the section “COPYRIGHT ET COPYLEFT SUR SAMIZDAT.NET".[6] The collective claims that:

“We are by definition opposed to anything that could limit the free circulation of knowledge and cultures, and therefore, to all forms of private appropriation of intellectual creations".[7]

However, samizdat.net does not embrace the extreme “no copyright” perspective which it views as dangerous as it could lead to private appropriation and unwanted commercial use. Instead, it recommends to use copyleft [8] licenses for software production, and free copy verbatim[9] for texts that wouldn’t benefit from modifications (e.g., opinion pieces).[10]

The collective’s strong stance on the issues of free circulation of knowledge and copyright is one of the ways it positions itself against the domination of commercial interests in French society, and more broadly against neo-liberal globalization.

Social consciousness
Back to the historical Samizdat, there was more to the system than the notion of self-publication. As the Samizdat system developed, it “was transformed from an incidental use of forbidden information to a form expressing social consciousness when it began to grow into an independent area of culture that saw itself not as a corrective or a supplement to official Soviet culture but as a self-contained and singularly original sphere for the realization of society’s spiritual and intellectual life".[11]

Undoubtedly samizdat.net seeks to express a form of social consciousness. However, instead of focusing on society’s “spiritual and intellectual life”, it puts the emphasis on the political realm, and particularly the political impact of communication technologies. Samizdat.net presents itself as “a political collective in the alternative communication area, particularly via the net".[12]

Moreover, in a section dedicated to free software, under the heading L'Esprit du Libre (The Spirit of Freedom), the collective states:

"Because we believe that access to information and knowledge is one of the major social challenges today, the spirit of free software seems to be politically apt. Where there are many (on the left) who call for state intervention, or refer to the myth of the new “welfare state” to satisfy fundamental social needs, free software is proof that a model combining communal practices and individual initiative, economic compatibility and social utility, is possible and offers the outlines for a concrete utopia".[13]

While this statement reinforces the views expressed about copyright, the rejection of government intervention also makes explicit samizdat.net’s libertarian position. The notions of communal practices are also mirrored by the site’s activities. These activities include:

Moderating spaces for political & cultural publications, and independent news.

Maintaining various communications mechanisms on the samizdat.net server for various activist organizations: mailing lists, databases, web hosting etc.

Training in net-specific communication tools, and particularly free software, for activist organizations and groups.

Implementing temporary communication systems for one-time events.

Contributing to a theoretical and political reflection on issues related to communication, intellectual property and social cooperation, specifically via texts published in various magazines (and available via samizdat.net).

Helping organizing conferences (digital counter-cultures, network activists…).

Participating in awareness or action-oriented campaigns with other groups.

Throughout its activities, the collective conveys the view that communication technologies are a political tool. The underlying assumptions are that access and expertise are key to gain visibility and influence. Samizdat.net lends its expertise and resources to these activities groups who would otherwise be marginalized by the technology gap. These activities also demonstrate the value and viability of cooperation, in contrast to the notion of individualism so celebrated in mainstream society. This view on communication technologies is yet another component to the collective’s position vis-à-vis neo-liberal globalization. To samizdat, communication technologies are used according to the ideology of the free market but they can be reappropriated. Also, cooperation is a viable solution to fight the dominating neo-liberal order.

Through these opinions, values, and activities, the collective seeks to convey the message that the economic and social realms can be re-connected meaningfully; they are not necessarily antithetical. Moreover, by promoting the use of communication technologies in order to reach out to people in the real world, samizdat.net demonstrates that the space of flows can be “domesticated” in order to serve the space of places.

Another question arises regarding samizdat.net: is it an “independent area of culture” and a “self-contained sphere”? The examination of samizdat.net’s content and “sphere of influence” (developed in the next section, “samizdat.net – what is it?”) seems to indicate that indeed the collective operates within an independent area of culture, and that it is largely self-contained. However, because this study is only preliminary, the viewing samizdat.net as a self-contained sphere is merely a speculation. Further investigation is required in order to assess the actual influence in the real world of the alternative groups promoted by the site.

Given its clandestine status and social “mission”, Samizdat had no commercial interests, but also no position towards the issue of commercialism given the political context in which it was operating (i.e., Soviet regime). The situation is different for samizdat.net. The publishing mechanisms and the values they abide to regarding publishing (i.e., copyleft or free copy verbatim) reflect their desire to resist actively what has become a commercial/consumerist society, and thus capitalism. Their strategy (free circulation of knowledge, free software, etc.) is typical of a libertarian organization.

Censorship

An important function for Samizdat was to circumvent censorship in order to spread ideas unacceptable to authorities, but that represented a source of hope for the citizens repressed by the Soviet regime. Of course, the major difference today is that there is no such explicit censorship from the government authorities. The collective is free to express its views in the open; it is very unlikely to be sanctioned. But samizdat.net faces another powerful form of censorship exercised by the mainstream media. Whether they choose to ignore or to distort the views expressed by alternative collectives such as samizdat.net, the mainstream media can effectively censor these collectives. Which in fact they do since they are driven by commercial interests, and would clearly not benefit from promoting views that may upset the existing order and their own power.

In response to the mainstream/global media censorship, samizdat.net not only harshly criticizes the mainstream media (via one of its offsprings Acrimed), but also offers an alternative solution suggested in their motto: “Don’t hate the media, become the media”, and implemented through some of the site’s activities described earlier.

Furthermore, there is a sense that, despite the fact that the French government has little power over the content and tools diffused over the internet, the collective is nevertheless very wary of the government. This is doubtless related to its libertarian ideology, but may also be grounded in some fears created by the French government in 1997 for instance, when it attempted to pass a regulation at the European level designed to enable the authorities to censor “unacceptable” content.[14]

In order to assess whether samizdat.net is an “independent area of culture” and a “self-contained sphere” (a question that was raised in the previous section), a tour of samizdat.net’s web site and an exploration of its sphere are in order. Samizdat could be defined as a portal to alternative voices, but the term is not really apt because of its commercial connotation. The term hub is probably more adequate.

An examination of the homepage shows that samizdat.net dedicates most of the space on its homepage to alternative news. In brief, the page is divided into three main segments. I will elaborate on the different segments in subsequent sections. But to summarize, the left column provides news bites selected by the collective, about groups adhering to similar views and/or actions/events organized by these groups. It is updated several times a month. The column in the center displays links to news bites provided by Hacktivist News Services Reloaded[15],an alternative news service that is an offshoot of the initial entity samizdat.net. The links appear to be updated several times a week.

Lastly, the right column provides navigation to the various services offered by samizdat.net. Of particular interest is the link to Agenda (calendar) where alternative groups can post their events. Also there are links to various mailings lists managed by the collective, as well as links to several web sites that are either offshoots, or hosted by, or endorsed by samizdat.net.

A philosophy of resistance to the neo-liberal order

To reiterate Castells’ perspective, resistance identity basically consists in the exclusion of the excluders by the excluded and entails the reversal of the dominating value judgments as well as the reinforcement of the boundaries between excluders and excluded. Arguably, samizdat.net is engaged in resistance identity.

The reversal of value judgments translates through samizdat.net’s publishing philosophy, namely, a commitment to share texts and software freely, and to publish solely texts that are outside of the mainstream media realm. It also shows through its deliberate choice to only give a voice to alternative groups that are usually viewed as marginal groups, because they promote values that go against the status quo and could be threatening to the established order (i.e., global capitalism, statism, patriarchalism). More generally, samizdat.net’s libertarian ideology is in direct conflict with the dominant order.

The reinforcement of the boundaries occurs in parallel to the assertion of these reversed value judgments, thus leading to an independent area of culture and a self-contained sphere. In other words, samizdat.net functions within its own universe to a certain extent. Although it seeks to promote actions in the real world, these actions appear to be confined within a parallel self-contained social sphere.

Despite these limitations, I would argue that there is potential for the collective to reach out and maybe create ripple effects within French society at large, thus moving into the realm of project identity in order to effect change. The reason for this optimistic assertion is that samizdat.net and some of its affiliates also display strong ties with the international libertarian community. The frequent use of English on these sites (the motto “Don’t hate the media. Become the media” is particularly notable) as well as the way it promotes free software sites based in the US demonstrates that there is a global dimension to the collective’s identity, as it strongly relates to the US libertarian computing community that created the Internet. I believe that this community (that embraces egalitarian values) has a significant, albeit elusive, influence on society globally. The collective has the potential to leverage this global dimension in order to widen the scope of its appeal and to mobilize individuals outside of its current French libertarian sphere. I see this as appealing because it is a way to reconnect the space of flows to the space of places, and hopefully to subordinate the former to the latter.

It is important to note that this study is only exploratory. Further investigation is needed in order to address specifically how the collective is attempting to reappropriate the media in order to fight corporate global media. Bourdieu’s perspective on the French media seems to be especially appropriate to address this issue. Finally, an exhaustive exploration of French cyberactivism will be helpful so as to assess whether cyberactivism has indeed the potential to mobilize citizens against the threats of globalization.

References

[0] The term anti-globalization is misleading in English. There is a growing tendency to use the term “altermondialiste” instead of “anti-mondialiste”. Altermondialiste literally refers to an alternative global world; it does not have the connotation of total rejection without any alternative solution that it has in English.
[1] The Power of Identity, p11.
[2] Ibid., p9.
[3] Let’s note that “the subject is not the individual, but a collective social actor through which individuals reach holistic meaning in their experience”. Ibid., pp9-10.
[4] Ibid., p11.
[5] Balasz, Sharon (2000). Samizdat and the Internet – A comparison. Retrieved from http://www.slis.ualberta.ca/issues/sbalazs/samizdat.htm
[6] http://infos.samizdat.net/article.php3?id_article=82
[7] My translation
[8] Copyleft: principle underlying the system of free software licenses for the GNU project – uses copyright rules to guarantee: freedom of use, freedom of reproduction, freedom of modification (which presupposes access to sources), and freedom to diffuse the modified versions as long as these are under the copyleft rules as well.
[9] Free copy verbatim: free integral reproduction, without modification, and including a notice about free reproduction.
[10] The possibility to resort to illegal copy is also mentioned for particular cases: it is acceptable to consider the right to copy over the right to intellectual property, as defined in commercial law. This is the case when a member of the organization is interviewed. There is a “moral” right the views expressed belong to the member.
[11] Meerson-Aksenov, Michael. “The dissident movement and samizdat. The political, social and religious thought of Russian samizdat - an anthology.Eds. Michael Meerson-Aksenov and Boris Shragin. Belmont, MA: Nordland Publishing, 1977.
[12] My translation http://samizdat.net/racine/association_reloaded.html
[13] My translation http://infos.samizdat.net/article.php3?id_article=81
[14] e.g., information about former Psdt. Mitterrand’s cancer that appeared on the net although it was confidential.
[15] http://www.hns-info.net
[16] Worldwide Fight AIDS Day
[17] For instance, making stickers available to anyone interested. These stickers carry a message about sexism in advertising. The organizers expect that these will be apposed onto outdoors advertisements that appear to objectify women.
[18] http://fsl-sla.eu.org
[19] Event dedicated to anarchist writings.
[20] Very similar to a blog and operating via free software.
[21] http://www.geneva03.org
[22] http://www.gisti.org
[23] Acrimed is a very interesting site. It provides thorough and up-to-date analyses of the coverage of issues in mainstream media that are central to samizdat’s concerns and raison d’être.