From: "Glen Fuller" <glenfuller-AT-iinet.net.au>
Subject: Re: territorialisation
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 16:44:07 +0800


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.


Steve/All,

I found the first two chapters of Justin Rosenberg's book online, and includes the Scholtes' chapter (http://www.theglobalsite.ac.uk/press/012rosenberg.htm). Rosenberg's critical analysis of Scholtes' thesis is a bit melodramatic, like a used car salesman's spiel! And he seemed to want to pig-headedly refuse to pursue the possibilities and effects of the compression of space/time that the revolution to current telecommunications technologies have allowed. I found this troubling. Maybe Rosenberg has not read D&G or Virilio? As I think this compression is essential in understanding the effects of deterritorialisation (and hence paradigmic shifts in the relationship between social relations and spatio-temporal referents (territorialisations)), what do you think?

>From such compression causal relationships are enabled to be remade from top-down hierarchial structures into feedback and feedforward systems involving multiple fields of interactivity... Surely the move from Fordist to Post-Fordist manufacturing techniques exemplifies this shift?

(Rosenberg appears to have a grounding in IR, which in this context stands for International Relations, but at my local universities stands for Industrial Relations...Anyway, he seems to want a structuralist definition of social relations that take part on a 'global' level. Maybe he is trying to fend off academic faculty creep, that is, other social sciences impinging on his specialist area? Perhaps I am being too skeptical...)

One secondary text (http://www.emory.edu/SOC/globalization/reviews/scholte.html) was critical of the way Scholte tackled culture. This would be my main interest in the text. As part of my PhD studies will involving 'tracing' the relationships between different subcultural forms from different national contexts and their importation/exportation, and media representations of such subcultural forms in the new 'home' nation. 

>From what I understand of Scholte's thesis (from Rosenberg's 'treatment' and other secondary texts I found) he defines it along spatio-temporal lines, involving "transborder exchanges without distance" (49). I can live with that definition, but what about the local then? Is that some pre-globalised territorialised milieu? Or is it a material instantiations (of various durations) in which the supraterritorial comes 'home'?

At any rate, I will hunt down the actual text.

Glen.

PS One of his chapters (in part 3) is called "Globalization and (In)Security". Which I find a remarkable coincidence as I talked about a subcultural (in)security for Hoons in my honours thesis, however, I was drawing on Hebdige's notion of an (in)subordination. I wonder how similar our arguments are regarding what (in)security is? I mainly drew on social welfare theory as outlined in a number of chapters in the (Foucaultian) book Govermentality, and inversed the 'insurer logic' that created 'risks', and argued that Hoons (intentionally aggressive drivers, normally young males) generated an (in)security that was central to borders of cultural difference.

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: steve.devos
  To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
  Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 4:59 AM
  Subject: territorialisation


  Glen/All

  I'm reading Justin Rosenberg's text The follies of globalisation theory.  The section entitled Scholtes Folly is extremely pertinant to our discuission on local/global - he use the term deterritorialisation but detaches it from the re-. For Scholte - who defines globalisation as the having only one acceptable meaning, denying the relevance of notions such as liberalisation, internationalisation, westernisation and so preferring instead to equate globalisation with - Deterritorialisation which " alone identifies something which is historically new, which has no real causal significance that is irrduciable to the others, and which therefore merits the use of a new term..."  The strange but rather interestingly a seemingly reactionary use of Deleuze - appearing to remove the problems and issues that globalisation generates which D&G would never have done, through the slight of hand that occurs when the other side of the binary pair is not invoked and we are left adrift in the flows of capital... If for Negri the deterritorialisation of globalisation enables him to propose out reterritorialisation in 'Empire' with Scholtes we are left adrift in 'supraterritoriality'....(a term through which everything that makes up my everyday life is seperated from morderity and post-modernity and placed adrift in the flows of space and time...



  Check it out I think you might like it Glen,  Scholtes - Globalisation: a critical introduction.

  regards
  steve
  Globalization: A Critical Introduction 
  Jan Aart Scholte  Our Price: =A316.99

HTML VERSION:

----- Original Message -----

From: steve.devos

To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu

Sent: Saturday, January 25, 2003 4:59 AM

Subject: territorialisation

Glen/All

I'm reading Justin Rosenberg's text The follies of globalisation theory.  The section entitled Scholtes Folly is extremely pertinant to our discuission on local/global - he use the term deterritorialisation but detaches it from the re-. For Scholte - who defines globalisation as the having only one acceptable meaning, denying the relevance of notions such as liberalisation, internationalisation, westernisation and so preferring instead to equate globalisation with - Deterritorialisation which " alone identifies something which is historically new, which has no real causal significance that is irrduciable to the others, and which therefore merits the use of a new term..."  The strange but rather interestingly a seemingly reactionary use of Deleuze - appearing to remove the problems and issues that globalisation generates which D&G would never have done, through the slight of hand that occurs when the other side of the binary pair is not invoked and we are left adrift in the flows of capital... If for Negri the deterritorialisation of globalisation enables him to propose out reterritorialisation in 'Empire' with Scholtes we are left adrift in 'supraterritoriality'....(a term through which everything that makes up my everyday life is seperated from morderity and post-modernity and placed adrift in the flows of space and time...



Check it out I think you might like it Glen,  Scholtes - Globalisation: a critical introduction.

regards
steve
Globalization: A Critical Introduction  
Jan Aart Scholte Our Price: =A316.99