SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi / 2024 / Cilt: 79 Sayı: 2

NEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM

Gözetim Kapitalizminin Yeni Yerel Yönetimleri

Nur Banu Çağatay, Ahmet Güven

Pages
251–280
Publication Date
2024-06-04
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗

Abstract

The surveillance processes of states and the way capitalism uses the market have transformed in a way that is not the first time but unlike the previous one. Instead of talking about the capitalist processes of the states alone, it makes more sense to argue that with surveillance capitalism, which tries to get itself out of the limited duties and actions of the state, and while getting stronger together with companies, it also puts aside being a state and progresses towards becoming a company itself and its institutions. While the article aims to show how states manage their own institutions -local governments/municipalities- in the process, based on the data-based accumulation of surveillance capitalism, and how citizens are transformed into datadaş (dataship) and tries to make visible how citizens swap their rights under the name of ‘consent’. In doing so, examples are presented through the role of local governments in countries such as China, Russia, the United States, Germany and Turkey in the process of surveillance capitalism.

Özet

Devletlerin gözetim şekli ve kapitalizmin piyasayı kullanma biçimi sürekli değişmektedir. Bu değişimler zamanın ihtiyaçlarına ve olanaklarına göre gerçekleşmektedir. Örneğin 18.yy’ın gözetleme aracı Panoptikon iken, bugünün gözetleme aracı telefonlardır. Panoptikon’un gözlemcileri kulelerinde nöbet tutanlar ise, bugünün gözlemcileri sokak duvarlarına asılmış kameralardır. Kapitalizm piyasayı üretim araçlarının mülkiyetiyle kullanırken, bugün anlam üretiminin mülkiyetini de içererek kullanmaktadır. Tek başına devletlerin kapitalist süreçlerinden bahsetmek yerine gözetim kapitalizmiyle kendisini devletin sınırlandırılmış görevlerinin ve eylemlerinin dışına çıkarmaya çalışan bir devlet yapısından bahsedilecektir. Çünkü, şirketlerle birlikte güçlenirken aynı zamanda klasik devlet olmayı bir kenara bırakarak kendisinin ve kurumlarının da birer şirket olma yolunda ilerlediğini tartışmak daha anlamlı durmaktadır. Bu izlekte makale, belirgin örnekler olduğu düşünülen devletlerin şirketlerle birlikte gerçekleştirdikleri eylemleri, yerel yönetimleri ve lider pozisyonda olan şirketlerle kurdukları ilişkileri tartışmaktadır. Makale, devletlerin gözetim kapitalizminin veri tabanlı birikiminden hareketle, kendi kurumlarını -yerel yönetimleri/belediyeleri- sürece dâhil ederek onları da nasıl şirketleştirmeye yönelttiğini göstermeyi amaçlamaktadır. Hizmet verenlerin değişimine yönelik hizmet alanlar olarak vatandaşların da nasıl birer datadaş’a dönüştürüldüğünü ve haklarını ‘rıza’ adı altında nasıl takas ettiklerini görünür kılmaya çalışmaktadır. Bunu yaparken, Çin, Rusya, Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Almanya ve Türkiye gibi ülkelerin yerel yönetimlerinin, gözetim kapitalizmi sürecinde edindikleri roller üzerinden örnekler sunulmaktadır

Keywords
🔖

Cite This Article

Çağatay, N. B., Güven, A. (2024). NEW LOCAL GOVERNMENT OF SURVEILLANCE CAPITALISM. Ankara Üniversitesi SBF Dergisi, Cilt: 79 Sayı: 2, 251–280. https://doi.org/10.33630/ausbf.1214973

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

↗New Tab

Loading PDF document...

References (72)

  1. Arendt, Hannah (2012), Geçmişle Gelecek Arasında. (Çev. Bahadır Sina Şener), (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları).
  2. Arendt, Hannah (2006), Between Past and Future: Eight Exercises in Political Through (New York: Penguin).
  3. Babrook, Richard and Andy Cameron (1996), “The Californian Idelogy”, Science as Culture, 6 (19): 44-72.
  4. Ball, Laurence and Robert Tchaidze (2002), “The Fed and The New Economy”, The Americand Economic Review, 92 (2): 108-114.
  5. Battilana, Julie, Matthew Lee, John Walker, and Cheryl Dorsey (2012), “In Search of The Hybrid Ideal”, Stanford Social Innovation Review, 10 (3): 51-55.
  6. Bayram, İsmail Gökhan (2022), BTK Damgalı İnternet Ehliyeti, Evrensel.net, https://www.evrensel.net/yazi/91306/btk-damgali-internet-ehliyeti
  7. Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim Kurumu (BTK) (2017), Çalışmalar, https://www.btk.gov.tr/bilgi-toplumuna-donusum-calismalar
  8. Benkler, Yochai (2006), The Wealth of Networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom, New Haven (CT: Yale University Press).
  9. Berman, E. Alison (2016), “MIT’s Sandy Pentland: Big Data Can Be a Profoundly Humanizing Force in Industry”, Singularity Hub, https://singularityhub.com/2016/05/16/mits-sandy-pentland-big-data-can-be-a-profoundly-humanizing-force-in-industry/
  10. Bostman, Rachel (2017), Big Data Meets Big Brother as China Moves to Rate Its Citizens, https://www.wired.co.uk/article/chinese-government-social-credit-score-privacyinvasion
  11. Bruneel, Johan, Nathalie Moray, Robin Stevens and Yves Fassin (2016), “Balancing Competing Logic in For-Profit Social Enterprises: A Need for Hybrid Governance”, Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 7 (3): 1-27.
  12. Calzada, Igor (2018), “‘Algorithmic Nations’: Seeing Like A City-Regional And Techno-Political Conceptual Assemblage”, Regional Studies, Refional Science, 5 (1): 267-289.
  13. Cherry, Colin (1978), On Human Communication: A Review, A Survey And A criticism, (London: MIT Press).
  14. China Law (2021), Chongqing Municipal Social Credit Regulations, China Law Translate, https://www.chinalawtranslate.com/en/%E9%87%8D%E5%BA%86%E5%B8%82%E7%A4%BE%E4%BC%9A%E4%BF%A1%E7%94%A8%E6%9D%A1%E4%BE%8B/
  15. Confessore, Nicholas (2018), “Cambridge Analytica and Facebook: The Scandal and the Fallout So Far”, The New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html
  16. Constantiou, D. Ioanna and Jannis Kallinikos (2014), “New Games, New Rules: Big Data and The Changing Context of Strategy”, Journal of Information Technology, 1-14.
  17. Dalh, Robert (2022), “Democracy”, Britannica, https://www.britannica.com/topic/democracy Dribbisch, Katrin (2019), “Digital Transformation in Germany”, The Service Gazette, https://medium.com/the-service-gazette/digital-transformation-in-germany-45b6bfa7e8c8
  18. Drucker, F. Peter (1993), “The Rise of The Knowledge Society”, The Wilson Quarterly, 17 (2): 52-71.
  19. Drucker, F. Peter (2013), Post-Capitalist Society, (Oxford: Butterwoth-Heinemann).
  20. Donnelly, Drew (2022), “China Social Credit System Explained- What is it & How it is Work?” Horizons, https://nhglobalpartners.com/china-social-credit-system-explained/
  21. Eroğlu, Doğu (2022), “BTK-gate’le Toplanan Kişisel Veriler Nasıl Kullanılabilir: Profilleme, Fişleme, Siyasal Manipülasyon ve Daha Fazlası”, Medyascope, https://qoshe.com/medyascope/dogu-eroglu/btk-gate-le-toplanan-kisisel-veriler-nasil-kullanilabilir-profilleme-fisleme-siyasal-manip-/143087812
  22. Eroğlu, Doğu (2022a), “Belgeleri İle BTK-gate (3): BTK-gate’in Önceki Gözetim Girişimlerinden Farkı Ne?”, Medyascope, https://qoshe.com/medyascope/dogu-eroglu/belgeleriyle-btk-gate-3-btk-gate-in-onceki-gozetim-girisimlerinden-farki-ne-/143593650
  23. Equalocean (2021), Suzhou Municipal Government Signs Strategic Cooperation Agreement with Tencent, https://equalocean.com/briefing/20210108230017613
  24. Europian Commission (EC) (2022), From the Public Sector Information (PSI) Directive to the Open Data Directive, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/psi-open-data
  25. Europian Commission (EC) (2022a), EU Cohesion Policy: More Than 1.5 Million EU-funded Projects Accessible in New Public Platform, https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/news/eu-cohesion-policy-more-15-million-eu-funded-projects-accessible-new-public-platform
  26. Foucault, Michel (1995), Disipline & Punish. (Trans. Alan Sheridan), (New York: Random House).
  27. Federal Ministry of Justice (BMJ) (2022), Basic Law for The Federal Republic of Germany, https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/englisch_gg/englisch_gg.html
  28. Federal Ministry of The Interior (2019), “Modellkommune Open Government” (2022), Note on Data Protection, https://www.bmi.bund.de/DE/themen/moderne-verwaltung/open-government/modellkommune/modellkommune-node.html
  29. Han, Byung-Chul (2022), Enfokrasi. (Çev. Mustafa Özdemir), (İstanbul: Ketebe Yayınları).
  30. Habermas, Jürgen (1997), Kamusallığın Yapısal Dönüşümü. (Çev. Tanıl Bora), (İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları).
  31. Hayek, Friedrick (1995), “Hayek’s The Road Freedom Revisited: Government Failure in The Argument Against Socialism”, Eastern Economic Journal, 21 (1): 7-26.
  32. Jacobs, Alan (2021), “From Tech Crutique to Ways of Living”, The New Atlantis, https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/from-tech-critique-to-ways-of-living
  33. Klessmann, Jens (2015), “GovData-The Data Portal For Germany”, Fraunfoker FOKUS, https://wiki.openmod-initiative.org/images/6/63/Jens-opendata_govdata.de_FraunhoferFokus.pdf
  34. Lin, Liza, and Dan Stumpf (2022), “Latest U.S Chip Curbs Deliver Setback to China’s AI Ambitions”, Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/articles/latest-u-s-chip-curbs-deliver-setback-to-chinas-ai-ambitions-11662037050
  35. Lipartito, Kenneth and Josh Lauer (2021), “Modern Capitalism is Inseparable from Surveillance”, The Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/09/22/modern-capitalism-is-inseparable-surveillance/
  36. Liu, Ziyu Kevin (2019), “Commercial-State Empire: A Political Economy Perspective on Social Surveillance in Contemporary China”, The Political Economy of Communication, 7 (1): 3-29.
  37. Loubere, Nicholas and Stefan Brehm (2018), “The Global Age of Algorithm: Social Credit and the Financialisation of Governance in China”, Made in China Journal, https://madeinchinajournal.com/2018/05/17/the-global-age-of-algorithm-social-credit-and-the-financialisation-of-governance-in-china/
  38. Mergel, Ines, Noella Edelmann, and Nathalie Haug (2019), “Defning Digital Transformation: Results from Expert Interviews”, Government Information Quarterly, 1-16.
  39. Mergell, Ines (2021), “Digital Transformation of the German State”, Sabine Kuhlmann, Isabella Proeller, Dieter Schimanke (Der.), Public Administration in German, (UK: University of Birmingham Birmingham): 331-346.
  40. Newman, Jared (2009), Google’s Schmidt Roasted for Privacy Comments, https://www.pcworld.com/article/515472/googles_schmidt_roasted_for_privacy_comments.html
  41. Pache, Anne Claire and Filipe Santos (2013), “Inside the Hybrid Organization: Selective Coupling as a Response to Competing Institutional Logics”, Academy of Management Journal, 35 (3): 455-476.
  42. Pentland, Alex (2013), “Society's Nervous System: Building Effective Government, Energy, and Public Health Systems”, MIT Open Access Articles, 1-14.
  43. Pentland, Alex (2015), Social Physics: How Social Networks Can Make Us Smarter (London: Penguin Books).
  44. Porth, Jan, Friederike Bickmann, Patrick Schweizer, and Zarina Feller (2021), “Appendix: Open Government”, Kuhlmann, Sabine, Isabella Proeller ve Dieter Schimanke (Der.), Public Administration in German, (UK: University of Birmingham Birmingham): 349-354.
  45. Rozhkov, Roman (2016), “Na Poroge Novogo Eko (On the Verge of a New Eco)”, Kommersant, https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/3135532
  46. Sayood, Khalid (2006). Introduction to Data Compression, (London: Elsevier Press).
  47. Sberbank (2018), https://www.sberbank.com/investor-relations/ir/news/article?newsID=fd45ede8-9694-4a07-8f9d-e4b0b82068eb&blockID=7&regionID=77&lang=en&type=NEWS
  48. Seattle (2018), Surveillance Ordinance, Seattle.gov, https://www.seattle.gov/tech/initiatives/privacy/surveillance-technologies/about-surveillance-
  49. Seattle (2022), The Charter The City of Seattle, Seattle.gov, https://library.municode.com/wa/seattle/codes/municipal_code?nodeId=TIT14HURI_CH14.18ACUSSUTE
  50. Seddon, Max (2018), “Sberbank: The Bank Trying to Shape Russia’s Future.” Financial Times, https://www.ft.com/content/3450c840-c0a4-11e8-95b1-d36dfef1b89a
  51. Skinner, Burrhus Frederic (2002), Beyond Freedom & Dignity (Indianapolis: Hackett).
  52. Skinner, Burrhus Frederic (2005), Walden Two (Indianapolis: Hackett).
  53. Soldatov, Andrei and Irina Borogan (2022), CEPA, https://cepa.org/article/russias-surveillance-state/
  54. Solove, Daniel Justin (2013), “Introduction: Privacy Self-management and The Consent Dilemma”, Harvard Law Review, 126 (7): 1880–1904.
  55. Stevens, Robin, Nathalie Moray, and Johan Bruneel (2015), “The Social and Economic Mission of Social Enterprises: Dimensions, Measurement, Validation, and Relation”, Entrepreneurship, Theory and Practice, 39 (5): 1051-1082.
  56. Strumpf, Dan and Wenxin Fan (2017), “Who Wants to Supply China’s Surveillance State? The West”, Wall Street Journal, https://www.wsj.com/articles/who-wants-to-supply-chinas-surveillance-state-the-west-1509540111
  57. T.C. İçişleri Bakanlığı e-Belediye (2019), E-Belediye Bilgi Sistemi Projesi, https://www.belediye.gov.tr/e-belediye-bilgi-sistemi-projesi
  58. T. C. İnternet Ortamında Yapılan Yayınların Düzenlenmesi ve Bu Yayınlar Yoluyla İşlenen Suçlarla Mücadele Edilmesi Hakkında Kanun (2007), https://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.5.5651.pdf
  59. Tencent (2008), Tencent Invests CYN 550 Million in Chengdu, https://www.tencent.com/en-us/articles/80138.html
  60. The Digital Economy and Society Index (DESI) (2019), Country Report Germany, https://www.desi_2019_-_germany_BE74F764-DC66-1824-1B51870EA77804BB_59893.pdf
  61. The Federal Service for Supervision of Communications, Information Technology, and Mass Media (Roskomnadzor) (2022), Statute of Roskomnadzor, https://eng.rkn.gov.ru/about/
  62. Tracey, Paul, Nelson Phillips, and Owen Jarvis (2011), “Bridging Institutional Entrepreneurship and the Creation of New Organizational Forms: A Multilevel Model”, Organization Science, 22 (1): 60-80.
  63. Ubaldi, Barbara (2013), Open Government Data: Towards Empirical Analysis of Open Government Data Initiatives. OECD Working Papers on Public Governance No. 22. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/docserver/5k46bj4f03s7-en.pdf
  64. Utton, Rebecca (2021), What are Our Authorities’ Power of Surveillance in Investigations?, Birketts, https://www.birketts.co.uk/legal-update/what-are-local-authorities-powers-of-surveillance-in-investigations/#:~:text=The%20local%20authority%20does%20not,can%20carry%20out%20intrusive%20surveillance.
  65. Wegrich, Kai (2020), “Is the Turtle Still Plodding Along? Public Management Reform in Germany”, Public Management Review, 1-11.
  66. Xia, Zhang (2017), YICAI, https://www.yicaiglobal.com/news/tencent-guangzhou-government-agree-strategic-cooperation-to-build-new-type-smart-city
  67. Yoo, Youngjin (2010), “Computing in Everyday Life: A Call For Research on Experiential Computing”, MIS Quarterly, 34 (2): 213-231.
  68. Young, Meg, Michael Katell, and P. M. Kraft (2019), “Municipal Surveillance Regulation and Algorithmic Accountability”, Big Data and Society, 1-14.
  69. Yu, Katrina (2018). Big Brother is Coming: Inside China's Plan to Rate Its 1.3 Billion Citizens, https://www.sbs.com.au/news/big-brother-is-coming-inside-china-s-plan-to-rate-its-1-3-billion-citizens
  70. Zuboff, Shoshana (2015), “Big Other: Surveillance Capitalism and The Prospect of an Information Civilization”, Journal Information of Technology, (30): 75-79.
  71. Zuboff, Shoshana (2021), Gözetleme Kapitalizmi Çağı (İstanbul: Okuyan Us Yayınları) (Çev. Tolga Uzunçelebi).
  72. Zuboff, Shoshana (2020), “You are Now Remotely Controlled”, New York Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/24/opinion/sunday/surveillance-capitalism.html