Nobody talks much about capillary power these days. Probably because we have too many lessons in actual power. This was a predominant concept for many decades in social theory. Derived from Michel Foucault who held that power was not held by individuals or organizations, but spread through society. Every act of definition creates it. Every act of resistance renews it. It is hard to say as Foucault did, ‘Power is everywhere and nowhere’ when you can easily point to where power actually is. It is a pity as the persistent performance of power can bind us to its more subtle features. We can see is how much power is mythical, performative, rhetorical and psychological. Tone and texture matter. The main problem I have with the idea of disciplinary power is that often what he is describing is not power. It is more like bureaucratic busywork. What we are seeing is power becoming more personal and ‘hot’, losing its bloodlessness and focus on the normal in favour of the pathological. The world is re-enchanted.
As with his origin story in Manhattan real estate, Trump thinks in terms of turf, as in controllable territory. Turf is a common concept in organized crime. In Mexico it is called plaza. The dense network of relationships that matter. Controlling the political power in a territory is more important than having formal ownership. Turf is the thicket of political, familial, clannish and neighbourhood relationships that make power happen. Organized crime is a frequent mediator of this relationship. Turf also needs some measure of consent.Just as the British police often say they’re policing by consent, so organised crime also often does crime with consent. Or at least acquiescence.
One area where turf wars had become less consequential is face-to-face drug dealing. The popularity of the mobile phone seriously reduced turf conflicts (Edlund and Machado 2019). However, this belongs to an older era of digital life. Increasingly, we see digital space and resources foreclosed. The digital is a much more territorial space and has become like a limited territorial resource. The growing interest of organized crime in crypto is part of that. They do not have a lot of interest in resources that are widely networked and easily accessed. Their interest lies in resources where they can control and limit access and charge significant rents.
This also explains Trump’s approach to politics, finance, and the digital sphere shows that his most recent embrace of crypto is significant here. Crypto is by design a digital turf. By that I mean it is deliberately a restricted resource that cannot be scaled and instead must be controlled.
