Toward a discursive approach to growth models: social blocs in the politics of digital transformation

Abstract

The growth models perspective analyzes the role of social blocs in crafting countries' economic policies, but its treatment of business power as purely structural prevents it from addressing an important question in the politics of digital transformation: How have new sectors with miniscule economic footprints been able to influence economic policy? This paper explores how tech and venture capital successfully lobbied for financial deregulation at the beginning of digital transformation in the United States. The paper argues that explaining the role of social blocs in digital transformation requires incorporating discourse analysis and develops a conceptual framework around three discursive components in the dynamics of social blocs: coordination, persuasion, and performativity. This framework contributes to theory development in the growth models perspective and illustrates how the concept of social blocs can help make sense of the politics of digital transformation.

Digital Capitalism and Distributive Forces

“…There are long-standing precursors in this regard: from the influence of market-libertarian objectivism along the lines of Ayn Rand on the post-humanist ideas of important entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley (see Murnane 2018) to the so-called Californian ideology, which combines traits as contradictory as "the free-wheeling spirit of the hippies and the entrepreneurial zeal of the yuppies" (Barbrook/Cameron 1996: 44). This can currently be empirically verified in the intentionally instigated discourses via institutional coalitions between tech companies and venture capital (see Rothstein 2020). Besides this, global actors can be identified who tie considerable economic interests to the seemingly purely technologically inspired discourse of the digital future (Pfeiffer 2017).…”

“…We have already argued (see Chapter 3.1), proceeding from Mazzucato (2015), that risk investment has little to do with actual risk (and why this is so). We have seen (see Chapter 4.2) how venture capital has long been f lanked by discourses of legitimation surrounding disruption and deregulation (Barbrook/Cameron 1996;Murnane 2018), while its weight is increasingly ref lected in institutionalised relations between tech companies and venture capital firms (Rothstein 2020). There is no need to repeat all this here.…”

Stalling the State: How Digital Platforms Contribute to and Profit From Delays in the Enforcement and Adoption of Regulations

“…Various authors have already pointed out how digital platforms have been able to slow down the process of entering the stock market as they rely on “patient” capital to fuel their growth (Rahman & Thelen, 2019, pp. 179–180; Rothstein, 2021, pp. 16–17).…”

Digitalisierung als Distributivkraft

“…Kapitel 3.1) mit Mazzucato (2015) argumentiert, dass und warum Risikoinvestment gar nicht so viel mit Risiko zu tun hat, und gesehen (vgl. Kapitel 4.2), wie das ganze Venture-Capital-Geschehen schon lange von Legitimationsdiskursen rund um Disruption und Deregulierung f lankiert wird (Barbrook/Cameron 1996; Murnane 2018) und sich zunehmend in institutionalisierten Beziehungen zwischen Tech-und Venture-Capital-Firmen abbildet (Rothstein 2020). Das alles muss hier nicht noch mal erläutert werden.…”