Eight years ago you Netocrates text, translated and published in several countries. How can we explain that we only discovered now in France?

For Bard and Söderqvist, we are entering the final phase of the "beginning" of the emergence of a new era, an era netocratique, which indicates the end of capitalism. Since 2000, they defend their thesis of a major change in paradigm, thanks to the translation of their book, France will be able to join the debate. Why only now? The Netocratie can prevail in France? Context has he changed? Updated with stakeholders.
-- Full version of this interview published in Chronic'art # 42 (February 2008) --

Chronic'art: Eight years ago you Netocrates text, translated and published in several countries. How can we explain that we only discovered now in France?

Alexander Bard: First, it appears that France has not shown much interest in our futurologiques and social studies. Perhaps because only the older generation of intellectuals french - Jacques Derrida, for example - for which it is difficult to properly assess something really new, was until recently under the limelight. This situation seems to change, however: the French finally realize the depth of the revolution represented by the emergence of interactive media and Internet, and that this revolution is the main ingredient of the political and economic globalization as we know it today, hui. Is this awakening is due to the phenomenon of blogs, particularly strong in France? Then, it is a matter of timing because we had to wait to meet the right people with whom we wanted to work. It was after an interview with you-river, Chronic'art, that we were put in touch with the publisher Leo Scheer.

Jan Söderqvist: It is also about more mundane reasons and practices. By 2001, the idea of an English translation floating in the air, but there was no response. We were at that time very taken with the United States, English, South African and Spanish. I guess that the confusion has been reluctant to this initial contact: The Netocrates some see as a work of social philosophy, others think dealing with a book of business or management because it discusses the forces underlying the phenomenon of technology stocks (the dot.com bubble) and the fact that business strategies established, led by the bourgeoisie, do not really in this new media ecology. How to sell a book like this, which ignores all labels and all traditional conventions?

What the theory presented in your essay is it an oxymoron with french mind, as you say in your introduction?

A.B. : Our analysis is based on the culture of early adopters. To understand today's world, we look more to the use and the social implications of new information technologies and new interactive gadgets among Korean schoolgirls or fishermen in southern India that on the old references that everyone ressasse. After all, Max Weber had no idea what a mobile phone! Our analysis, hence, is fairly unflattering to the old elite, composed mainly of old journalists and authors males in Western Europe or North America. Our hypothesis reveals that they are historically destined to lose their dominant position, while new forces come into play Europe today is extremely conservative and complacent. This will require major efforts to Europeans to understand what the true radicalism of the new century.

J.S. : It is a classic, change is never good for the old elite in place. My opinion is that France is a very polarized country where there is a "left side" really conservative who dreams only of the status quo eternal and on the other, more pragmatic credentials realize that reactionary chauvinism is no longer an option now irrelevant.

Does the problem of France is not a nation that is very égocentrée (France, center of the world)?

A.B. : Anyone who has experienced a prosperous past will have some difficulty in accepting a future where he finds himself marginalized. France has been the center of the ancient industrial-capitalist paradigm, the modern nation-state and modernity are also born in France, this paradigm has been established by the thinkers of the Enlightenment. Suddenly, as the French identity is so tied to capitalism, it is not surprising that the country had more obstacles to overcome than others when it rubs in informationaliste paradigm. The mere asking of its positioning in the face of this new paradigm is quite revealing… The netocrates do not give a damn debate on the identity framed in a nationality. They always consider things on a global level and subculturel. Nationalism today is a phenomenon that interests only subclasses.

J.S. : Just look at the recent controversy surrounding the article in the Times on the death of French culture… It is always a sensitive subject in France, and this is not a good sign. The nationalist nostalgia is something so overwhelmed! No nation can now function as a trademark. We have lost too much time with such nonsense. The French are not the only ones to enjoy a quality food, good wine, fashion, art or philosophy! This is obviously bad news for French, who have always seen as culturally superior to others in many ways… "You sleep, you are dead," the saying has never been more true.

With netocratie, you expect the ultimate disappearance of the nation-state. But is it not an exaggeration to suggest that the Internet enough to accept this idea and to bring about a netocratique global governance?

A.B. : No, not at all. The old middle class is obsessed with nation states and the implications of national identity. The netocrates, they did not at all interested. It does not clearly Internet (no, or very few, sites devoted to the topic). Why? It's a question off topic in the daily lives of netocrates. None of them is going to sacrifice, for example, in France.

J.S. : Who are the flag bearers of the last in Europe? The old aristocrats, farmers force-fed grants and neo-fascists tattooed unemployment, ie the losers in the information age. The concept of nation-state has become incredibly obsolete because all true contemporary political issues leave the national sphere one after another to find itself in a supranational. The environment, defense, taxation, agriculture, health system, education… Everything! How can we have a national policy on the environment? What sense can this be? Whether you like your country or that you support fiercely your national football team, it does not matter: the national policy has become a charade senseless.

How do you receiving your theory in France? What will you see as potential subjects of contention?

A.B. As everywhere in Europe, the receipt of the book will differ depending generations. Young readers will quickly realize that what we are describing is the world in which they live, and which has never been described before. The older readers doubtless will oppose them, for emotional reasons, to our findings, as we move the priorities of the culture, politics, power and even the economy of contemporary society. I noticed that it is primarily our attack of humanism that offended readers older. The generational gap is typical of the way our theory is received in Europe and North America. In Asia and Africa, older readers have easier to accept than their western counterparts. It is perhaps for this reason that The Netocrates was so successful in emerging countries.

J.S. We are not representatives of trade: we are not trying to sell the Information Age french consumers, and we do the promotion of any ideology. We say simply that these changes happen, we wonder why they operate now, and why it's a good idea to try to understand them - in order not to be trashed. I think, like Alexander, that many young readers will find themselves in our book, or perhaps wonder why it is so outrageous as they say. From now on, every decade, a new generation lives and flourishes on a large scale in interactivity is something gained. Of course, those who have to make an effort to adapt to the Netocratie prefer to ignore it or are offended.

Do you think that Nicolas Sarkozy is a netocrate?

A.B. No, Sarkozy is not a netocrate. It is certainly a very good capitalist paradigm in the sense of the term, and, more importantly, it happens after many populist leaders and negligent in providing a bit of freshness. It is obviously more than the tragic netocratique Jacques Chirac, who was completely disconnected from the era in which he lived. Sarkozy is open to dialogue as the self Chirac ever did was.

J.S. : In truth, any politician came after Chirac had made a favourable impression, at least for some time. There is no doubt that Sarkozy appears to have a clearer view on the reforms needed in a particular sector. At the same time, it is true to the ideals that nationalists clearly betting on the restoration of cultural past glory of France. Unless this is the kind of rhetoric that a candidate still needs to France to get elected?

Or are we in 2008 compared to the paradigm shift that have described in 2001? At what stage of the process - the transition from capitalism to Netocratie - are we now?

A.B. We are still pretty young in the process. The power is still concentrated in the hands of capitalists and a handful of interactive technologies have, so to speak, shot their Thursday The motive, like the BlackBerry or laptop computers connected to broadband, are nothing deal with hundreds of interactive gadgets that will emerge in the coming decades, we are at the dawn of the interactive revolution. But what we are witnessing gives us enough evidence to assert that a radical change is under way. The fact that the revolution in interactive technological innovation deepest since the printing press - remember that the importance of the printing press has been just as much under-appreciated by historians and philosophers at the time - was something very controversial in the 1990's. This is almost the case today: the idea that technology leads the story and not vice versa has become a reality for most.

J.S. It was also important to remember that the printing press has been more than 300 years to develop fully in the guise of industrialism, liberal democracy, and so on. The major changes take time to implement, but the process of change is now faster than before. For example, the emerging phase zap cable connection to skip to the wireless connection. Mobile phones are becoming less expensive and more powerful. From fearsome predators swallow everything in their path in the market for consumer electronics. In Asia and Scandinavia, you have a culture of SMS very advanced. All these developments are taking place before our eyes and we do not know yet all the consequences that entails. To respond more specifically to your question, let us say that we are close to the final phase of the beginning.

What are the events that, from 2000 to today, illustrate the change that you describe, knowing, as you remember, that the environment changes faster than a man?

A.B. : It is too early to say. Our advice would be number 1: "Do not believe the hype! ". That is why we have taken great care in the years 1990, when the fashion of the technology stocks, which represented nothing compared to what real Internet, and we had predicted the crash of the bubble Internet 2000. It is not serious to say that a particular event has an important meaning and / or specific. We could talk about the success of Google, Facebook or MySpace, but it is likely that something that happened five years ago seemed ultimately far more important and sacrifices these adventures Internet for sweet initiatives largely overstated. Our job is not to take the train in motion, it is based on serious futurologiques and social studies.

J.S. : MySpace and Facebook are already perfect examples of applications merdiques overstated: nobody needs to reach 10000 amateur rock bands 10000 or having "friends"! Do not have time to manage it and what you can learn, it's a migraine. I find most interesting use of the Internet and mobile phones that are guerrilla, as is currently the case in Burma. Or maybe the Lewinsky scandal, although it dates from before 2000, because it symbolizes the end of an era of old and prestigious media firewalls. Now, everything is in the public square, more or less quickly. Such events mark the beginning of a new paradigm and new rules of social interaction.

What are the changes brought about by Netocratie that trigger, or will trigger, the most important "cognitive dissonance" and cause problems during the paradigm shift?

A.B. : Definitely, the conflict between the establishment media, who control people through mass media - including what politicians and the media sector in 300 years - and netocrates, whose objective is to maintain and " encourage the sharing of power through dialogue, the only way to earn stripes in society interactive. With such an abundance of media available, people become much more scrupulous vis-à-vis what they are consuming. And they do not consume much longer the media if they are not part of the production process itself. We must understand that we are really at the death of the mass media. Or rather, the mass media are reduced to chasing the lowest common denominator by going to hunt people in the lower class. The upper class, consisting of netocrates, only to the mass media, or any other assemblies, for their own contributions and creative.

J.S. : There is also globalisation, which will trigger dissonance literally global. While political issues leave the national sphere one after another and become supra, we are still not reached a consensus on what should be the political platform that would address these global problems. In my opinion, the determining factor is the emergence of a deadly virus from the Far East. People will be obliged to ask the policy an effective global and therefore to understand the need. You can be objected, of course, that this corresponds to the achievement of the old Marxist vision, that the left, in a way, has become nationalistic. Our second book, The Global empire, deals precisely with these issues.

What fundamentally opposed capitalism and Netocratie?

The role of the capitalist was to manufacture products, the marketer and selling them in making the most profit possible. For this, the financier was not only control the means of production, as Marx had shown, but also control the media market via marketing to facilitate the sale. Brand and marketing products become more important than the production itself (as is the case for a Vuitton bag sold in France, where the brand, but manufactured in China). The aura supersedes the substance and constantly seen already, in this sense, a change in the status of leading brands