scholarly journals Infrastructural power: discretion and the dynamics of infrastructure in action

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
David Pinzur
2020 ◽  
pp. 239965441989792 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yaffa Truelove

In Indian cities, a variety of state and non-state political actors and institutions play a role in regulating infrastructures in the everyday. Anthropological approaches to the everyday state have demonstrated how residents experience and discursively construct the state in relation to key services and amenities. However, less is known and theorized regarding how city-dwellers and public authorities understand and experience political space and power related to urban infrastructure that includes a variety of actors operating in tandem with, or even outside the bureaucracies and purview of, the state. This article partially addresses this lacuna through ethnographic research on (1) residents’ experiences and narrations of the everyday infrastructural governance of water and (2) the practices of key political actors who engage in regulating urban water infrastructures in Delhi’s neighborhoods. This research demonstrates that political actors’ and residents’ narratives and practices related to the infrastructural governance of water sharply contest both singular and dichotomous (state/non-state) readings of state power, instead revealing nuanced and situated understandings of hybrid and negotiated forms of “infrastructural power.” In particular, the practices and narratives of both residents and political authorities bring attention to the ways social and political power is decentered in the everyday and the porosity of the institutions of everyday infrastructural governance. My findings show the complex ways that infrastructures are tied to differing experiences, understandings, and articulations of power in relation to urban environments.


Teknokultura ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 77-85 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aitor Jiménez González

This article explores different bodies of literature looking at the rising power of digital corporations. With this work I aim to provide a critical up-to-date approach to the topic. The first part of the paper introduces the phenomenon of digital capitalism, navigating different sociological approaches. Then, it proceeds by addressing the difficulties of naming the phenomenon and the attention that is gathering among politicians, academics and the general public. The second part of the work explores three different but complementary bodies of literature looking at tech power In the first place the paper explores critical management studies’ contributions describing the characteristics of digital corporations. Secondly, the text reflects critical legal scholars’ works analysing what has been identified as one of the essential features of digital capitalism: the infrastructural power enjoyed by corporations such as Facebook or Amazon. Finally the paper exposes two different Marxist perspectives looking at digital capitalism and its latest developments. The labour-focused Marxist contribution mainly represented by Christian Fuchs and Trebor Scholz and the postfordist approach of Maurizio Lazzarato or Matteo Pasquinelli, among others.


2017 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 67-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olli Hellmann

This article argues that high levels of state capacity are not a sufficient condition for consolidating autocratic rule. Rather, whether non-democratic rulers can harness the infrastructural power of the state to implement strategies of regime stabilization depends on three crucial factors: the state’s social embedding; the international context; and the extent of elite cohesion. The paper develops this argument through a case study of the military–bureaucratic regime in South Korea (1961–1987), which – despite a high-capacity ‘developmental’ state at its disposal – failed to maintain high levels of resilience.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document