Nov 2023: New IMPACT book chapter

The book chapter shows that the academic discourse preceded the official discourse in theorising and explicitly articulating cyber/information sovereignty, and that while the academic discourse was broadly compatible with the official stance, important differences existed between the two in terms of argumentative tonality and conceptual and theoretical orientation.

November 22, 2023

Our IMPACT fellow Dr Johannes Thumfart has recently co-authored the book chapter “Cyber/Information Sovereignty and the Internet’s First Decade in China: Academic Debates and the Official Bu Zhenglun” in the Springerbook Quo Vadis, Sovereignty? New Conceptual and Regulatory Boundaries in the Age of Digital China. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-031-41566-1_1.

For the occasion, we have asked Johannes some questions regarding this output. Continue reading below…

Q: What inspired this article?

A: Our previous article* analyzed the position of academics in 1990s China regarding cyber/information sovereignty but did not touch on the government’s position. So this new book chapter fills that gap.

*(Cong, Wanshu, and Johannes Thumfart. ‘A Chinese Precursor to the Digital Sovereignty Debate: Digital Anti-Colonialism and Authoritarianism from the Post–Cold War Era to the Tunis Agenda’. Global Studies Quarterly 2, no. 4 (October 2022), https://doi.org/10.1093/isagsq/ksac059).

Q: What are the 2-3 key take away messages of your new publication?

A: The book chapter shows that the academic discourse preceded the official discourse in theorising and explicitly articulating cyber/information sovereignty, and that while the academic discourse was broadly compatible with the official stance, important differences existed between the two in terms of argumentative tonality and conceptual and theoretical orientation. Our sources reveal that the official policy of that time is decidedly pragmatic and characterized by Bu Zhenglun (不争论), a turn away from theoretical debate; in this context, particularly digitalization was uncritically promoted as a means to further economic development. In contrast to that, the academic debate of that time was critical of digitalization and underlined the need to develop a form of cyber/ information sovereignty to protect Chinese society from the negative side-effects of digitalization, which were connected to fears regarding regime change and even imagined as ‘cyber colonialism’.

Q: How was the writing process?

A: Wanshu and I collaborate regularly. We normally use Google Docs.

Q: What will the scientific and practical impact of this article be?

A: Our earlier research regarding the academic Chinese discourse on digital sovereignty in the 1990s, which was published by Global Studies Quarterly (Oxford University Press), opened a completely new horizon for intellectual history. This chapter completes the picture. Researchers and policy makers concerned with digital sovereignty and international relations involving China will benefit from this publication. You cannot understand the present without knowing the past.

Q: How does this article fit in your research career?

The book is part of a philosophy series, authors include some of the leading philosophers discussing digital technologies and law. It deepens my contacts at the Universities of Bologna and Oxford and strengthens my profile as a philosopher discussing the impact of digital technologies in the BRICS states. Last but not least, digital technologies in the BRICS states are also the main focus of my research project about internet shutdowns within IMPACT.