Cyberlibertarianism: The Right-Wing Politics of Digital Technology

by David Golumbia

Genres: Politics, Nonfiction, Technology, Social Issues

505 pages, Kindle Edition

Published November 12, 2024

Reviews

[Andrew · Rating 3 out of 5]

Confused. I think Golumbia presents a very important critique of the rhetoric we use when we discuss digital technologies, and how slogans such as "net neutrality," "open source," "open access," "piracy," "hacking," "free information," etc. are in fact derived from corporate/corporate-funded-nonprofit and academic sources and are political strategies with roots in the neoliberal right. These institutions in turn profess a set of contradictory values (privacy/openness) which he calls cyberlibertarianism, coalescing in this belief that technology should be outside government control. And in the end it's the platforms that benefit. But all of this leads him to believe that the only path forward is to increase regulation of technology via the state, strengthen the state against these rebellious actors, the state which is equated with democracy—because we have democratically elected officials?? It's kinda scary. For how long this was more needed to be said about the relationship between the state and platforms, the state and corporations.

To be fair, I think the part on SOPA and PIPA in Chapter 1 is pretty insighful and his analysis on the comparison of digital technology with the printing press in Chapter 4 is cool as well. Would like to see more reads and critiques of this.

[Dash T · Rating 3 out of 5]

On the whole, "Cyberlibertarianism" is a thoughtful and persuasive account for how tech enthusiasts can have left-leaning politics when it come to some issues, and yet hold neoliberal (if not outright right-libertarian) views when it comes to tech policy. Golumbia's critiques of "democratization", "innovation", and "openness" (as in "open-source") are especially strong.

The book tends to focus on ideology while downplaying history, which leads to some unconvincing arguments. Golumbia mostly treats "democracy" as synonymous with democratically-elected governments in general and in the US specifically. This doesn't account for the US government's enthusiastic espousal of neoliberal policies over the past several decades–often with direct input from tech companies. There are also some real head-scratchers, such as his claim that "almost everyone who identifies with digital technology thinks that copyright is an unadorned evil" and that "virtually all the gains made by progressive actors in the past two centuries, along axes like 'civil rights' and 'human rights', have been those implemented and, more important, made long-standing by democratically elected governments".

Golumbia also consistently downplays the risks of government surveillance, mentioning briefly that privacy and surveillance are "critical issues" for marginalized groups, but insisting that the US government has shown restraint as a whole. In the end, he calls for more regulation of tech, which is a reasonable suggestion as far as it goes, but the book's analysis does not address the crucial issue of how to address the risk of regulatory capture. He describes critics of government overreach as essentially useful idiots for right-libertarianism, which is an unfair generalization–and potentially dangerous in the upcoming years, which are looking to be a free-for-all for fascist tech billionaires.

[Tom King · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book deserves five stars because it clearly sets out the malignant beliefs and assumptions at the heart of the Internet we have, and how those are now infecting politics and society.

While the author was American and so the book inevitably focuses on the USA and its law and policy, the near-total capitulation by other nations to American capital and technology makes this screamingly relevant almost everywhere.

The author was very unwell when writing it and some sections read as slightly more unfinished or unedited. However, be in no doubt that David Golumbia was a unique person and, I would say, a visionary, capable of drawing together disciplines and challenging the underlying assumptions to reveal truth.

This book made me question the writing and opinions of some of the people I most respect. It is not comfortable. But it is vital and perhaps a starting point for a new way to think about what we truly want our shared communication and information to involve, and to reject.

Let's hope it's not too late to matter.

[Jules · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is full of quotes, but explicit examples are often lacking (which is odd, because that's often what he accuses his cyberlibertatians of). It's also quite disjointed at times but repetitive at other times. I stopped reading around page 275.

Golumbia often argues that cyberlibertarians throw out words without defining them. Then Golumbia uses terms like, "democracy" and "hate speech" without defining them, as if these were obvious and self evident. Politics in the last 10 years has shown that they are definitely not.

I found quite a few topics that Golumbia reduced to black and white which really should have been treated with more nuance. For example, he states open source is not really part of the gift giving economy because corporations often use open source software, but by making this argument, he basically argues that gift giving economies are fundamentally libertarian and exploitative. Except that they don't have to be, and lots of people have critiqued this aspect of open source software while still supporting open source as a concept, but Golumbia doesn't mention this nuance.

Furthermore, in terms of copyright, Golumbia is suddenly all for corporations and seems to trust what they say at face value. I find it especially egregious that, as an academic, he didn't address paywalls related to academic publishing. The argument there is that academic work is largely funded by taxpayers, but the results of such work are hidden behind paywalls. Authors of academic articles aren't compensated for their work, nor are peer reviewers, but academic publishers such as Elsevier are extremely profitable. This is a fundamental complaint about copyright that Golumbia ignores.

Overall, the book was thought-provoking but underdeveloped and frustrating.

[Barbara · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book questions the language and assumptions underlying the tech industry's quest for deregulation in ways that are very important and well-articulated, but alternative proposals are under evaluated. He equates democracy with increased regulatory control and centralized power, which are championed as unquestionable forces of good — obviously, there is nuance there that isn't explored. I think this comes down to poor organization and incompleteness as a result of Golumbia's death, given that the book overall was strangely organized. The substantive arguments remain important and interesting.

[E.A. Amant · Rating 5 out of 5]

Warning; this book was funded by Internews which was funded by USAID; and that dear reader is all you need to know: it is a CIA defamatory opt against Snowden, Assange and Greenwald.