I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my prior written consent. I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. I declare that my thesis consists of 85 102 words. This thesis weaves together the themes of complexity, technology, and power. It does so by examining how actors in world politics gain leverage over complex systems through the use of specialised ‘representational technologies’ that make these systems intelligible and amenable to manipulation. In response to the increasing complexity of regional and global systems, political actors are expanding their use of these representational technologies in order to augment limited individual and institutional means for cognition. A first conclusion from this research is that through these technologies, power is being expanded in novel and unique ways. Building upon an insight from actor-network theory (ANT), power is examined here as something that must be constructed via material technologies. Yet unlike previous research which has focused primarily on infrastructural technology, this thesis examines the unique role of representational technologies in constructing power. Following constructivism, this thesis accords a significant role to knowledge, discourse, and representations in how world politics are presented and acted upon. However, a second conclusion of this thesis is that the standard idealist accounts in constructivism must be expanded by examining the increasingly material means through which such ideational representations are constructed. Thirdly, this thesis aims to illuminate a neglected type of technology within International Relations (IR) scholarship – by moving away from the standard analyses of military and communication technology, and instead showing how representational technology contributes to the practices of world politics. Lastly, in emphasising the materiality of power and knowledge, this thesis also aims to revive a moderate version of technological determinism by arguing that technology is a platform which shapes both possible political behaviours and pathways for technological development. In the first place I want to thank my supervisor Kim Hutchings for her guidance throughout this project. Her ability to combine incisive criticism with generous supportiveness is extraordinary, and she played a major part in pulling this thesis out of its confused early years and turning it into this finished product. At the origins of my academic journey to this project lies one particularly influential figure: the professor who spurred my initial interest in politics and made exceptional efforts to support me. For all of that I want to thank Doug Long. Completing a PhD is alternately invigorating and infuriating, engaging and belabouring. Yet a close group has always been there and has played an immense role in making this work a much better piece than I alone could ever have done. So for their immense contributions in shaping this project I want to sincerely thank Alex Williams, Paul Kirby, and Ben Singleton. For years of affective camaraderie, intellectual jousting, and sharing various states of insobriety, I want to thank Alex Andrews, Eddie Arghand, Elie Ayache, Rena Barch, Nandita Biswas-Mellamphy, Michael Bloomfield, Antoine Bousquet, Ray Brassier, Levi Bryant, Emily Cody, Nathan Coombs, Diego de Merich, Mark Fisher, Myriam Fotou, Libby George, Joe Hoover, Marta Iniguez-De-Heredia, Mark Kersten, Nivi Manchanda, Reza Negarestani, Jacob Parakilas, John Protevi, Jono Rourke, Meera Sabaratnam, Elke Schwarz, Rajeev Sibal, and Pete Wolfendale. Lastly, for their support on every level and at every step of the way, I’d like to thank my family, Tony and Bonnie Srnicek, Greg Srnicek, and Mary-Ellen Mortier. Note that parts of Chapter 1 have previously been published in “Conflict Networks: Collapsing the Global into the Local” Journal of Critical Globalisation Studies, vol. 2, 2010, and parts of Chapter 2 have previously been published on The Disorder of Things blog. This research was supported by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council. “What has happened? Simply that our means of investigation and action have far outstripped our means of representation and understanding. This is the enormous new fact that results from all other new facts. This one is positively transcendent.”1 -Paul Valéry This thesis weaves together the themes of complexity, technology, and power. It does so by examining how actors in world politics gain leverage over complex systems through the use of specialised ‘representational technologies’ that make these systems intelligible and amenable to manipulation. In response to the increasing complexity of regional and global systems, political actors are expanding their use of these representational technologies in order to augment limited individual and institutional means for cognition. A first conclusion from this research is that through these technologies, power is being expanded in novel and unique ways. Building upon an insight from actor-network theory (ANT), power is examined here as something that must be constructed via material technologies. Yet unlike previous research which has focused primarily on infrastructural technology, this thesis examines the unique role of representational technologies in constructing power.2 Following constructivism, this thesis accords a significant role to knowledge, discourse, and representations in how world politics are presented 1 Valéry, “Unpredictability,” 69. 2 Callon and Latour, “Unscrewing the Big Leviathan: How Actors Macrostructure Reality and How Sociologists Help Them To Do So”; Guldi, Roads to Power: Britain Invents the Infrastructure State; Headrick, The Tools of Empire: Technology and European Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century; Schouten, “The Materiality of State Failure: Social Contract Theory, Infrastructure and Governmental Power in Congo.” and acted upon. However, a second conclusion of this thesis is that the standard idealist accounts in constructivism must be expanded by examining the increasingly material means through which such ideational representations are constructed. Thirdly, this thesis aims to illuminate a neglected type of technology within International Relations (IR) scholarship – by moving away from the standard analyses of military and communication technology, and instead showing how representational technology contributes to the practices of world politics. Lastly, in emphasising the materiality of power and knowledge, this thesis also aims to revive a moderate version of technological determinism by arguing that technology is a platform which shapes both possible political behaviours and pathways for technological development. One of the most common themes amongst the major crises of the modern world is the repeated reminder that our world is increasingly complex. Compared to previous periods of history our world is more interconnected (spreading crises further and less predictably), more dynamic (diffusing risks at a quicker pace), and more fragmented (with experts becoming specialised in solving local problems rather than systemic problems).3 This complexity involves a massive amount of elements, nonlinear dynamics, unintended effects, sensitivity to initial conditions, and feedback loops.4 These features of complex systems strain the limits of the human mind’s finite and embodied capacities.5 The 2008 financial crisis, the ongoing climate change crisis, the 2003 North American electrical blackout – all of these point to widely distributed complex systems which already surpass human capacities to cognise. If rational action requires a minimal capacity to represent the problems to be confronted, then the complex systems of today’s world are threatening to undermine the cognitive basis of political action. Given that 3 Perrow, Normal Accidents: Living with High Risk Technologies; Jervis, System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life. 4 Cederman, “Complexity and Change in World Politics: Resurrecting Systems Theory”; Geyer and Rihani, Complexity and Public Policy: A New Approach to 21st Century Politics, Policy and Society, chap. 1. 5 Jervis, System Effects: Complexity in Political and Social Life, 45. “legibility [is] a central aspect of statecraft”6, then the world today is characterised by systems that outpace any actor’s ability to comprehend them. According to the cultural theorist Fredric Jameson this situation indexes a lack of ‘cognitive mapping’ – the means to make our own world intelligible to ourselves through a situational understanding of our own position.7 Here Jameson draws upon urban theory which argues that in designing liveable spaces one must take into account how people navigate their way around cities. In encountering a new city, the individual is left without any cognitive map of the space and is forced to develop one through habit. The urban designer can in turn assist this process by strategically situating landmarks and other easily recognizable symbols in order to provide