Module 1 week 2, coercion versus reason, post class blog

An interesting nuance to the conversation on coercion versus reason is that it’s easy to struggle to identify the line between coercion and reason. I think our definition of Coercion bears reexamination as I propose there will be a change in what we define as hard power. The reason I think this has more to do with the changing nature of our world. Soft and hard power aren’t quite what they used to be anymore.

With the advent of the internet and mass supplied media we can see how public opinion itself has become a hard power. We have seen this power exemplified under the Trump administration. There have been wide swings with the stock market as announcements about policy changes within the government have occurred. In recent News, multiple media outlets covered stories speculating the potential for a trade war with China and the U.S. the stock markets tanked within 24 hours. It has been clear that negative news media can affect investors world-wide. The changes happen before there is any report into the potential validity. The effect of the media as a potential weapon has been exemplified by Russia efforts within the U.S. company Facebook. while not an official news site, Facebook been a social platform that disseminates information worldwide. I think that Facebook as utilized by Russia is a covert action I don’t use it to explain soft Versus hard power as much to exemplify the power of public opinion to have tangible effects. This rapid response is enabled by current technological changes.  It has been within the last 5 years that internet capable smart phone technologies coupled with widespread Wi-Fi have been widely available. Increased security has allowed people to have Apps with their bank accounts and stock portfolios at hang any given moment. This has presented an unprecedented ability to respond near instantaneously. This is interesting but also terrifying as people begin to digest” click bate” sound bites as fact without due diligence.  This widespread access to services and information has allowed businesses to grow internationally with ease.

 Tremendous global companies wield immense power and I believe the concept of sovereignty might be changing as a result.  We see now that certain companies have been able to expand globally and have a huge influence even more so than the government under which they might officially owe allegiance. Business and government have always had intersecting lines but now it is happening on a global scale where businesses are basically Comparison shopping for headquarters. An example of this is Apple. They made themselves headquartered in Ireland to avoid considerable taxes. They came back to the U.S. with the drop in corporate taxes. At the point that companies like apple can play off international actors and influence major changes in a country’s policies do we need to start considering them their own sovereign?