I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
-
@tante yes and no. Same goes for all kinds of politics based on sovereignity. You can't have a democratic state without a sovereign state, or democracy without some sort of popular sovereignity. Escaping nationalism is difficult when it's the basis for our modern political world.
How we should understand terms like popular sovereignity, democracy, states, nations and sovereignity are difficult political questions, and they lend themselves to both left-wing and right-wing interpretations. I think it is worth fighting over the interpretations rather than leave the terms to the right wing interpretations. -
@sanityinc @bsdphk @tante Digital Autarky?
-
You are not wrong, but I get the impression that this is to widen potential vocabulary so the concepts cannot be monopolized. To open the question of, "What do you really mean by that?"
Consider a counter example. (I read your bio and I'm sorry it's an american example - it's just the best one I have at this time in the morning)
When someone from rural Missouri says, "Those city folks." As code for negatively talking about black folk from St. Louis. It doesn't mean the words are bad words by themselves. It mean that person is dog whistling to other racists and that is important context to understand under the surface. Recognizing and questioning intent is important.
Typically the easiest way to undermine someone doing this is to ask, "which people?" It's stupidly simple, but can completely change group dynamics by someone backing off racist intent or doubling down. Which then clues in people who were not hearing this underlying context.
-
@tante I think it's more than just the term. Replacing American corporations with corporations of a different nationality is not a progressive project. That's what the liberal elites mean when they say "digital sovereignty" and it's fully compatible with fascist concepts of sovereignty.
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante To be clear, are you talking about the Sovereign Tech Agency and Sovereign Tech Fund, or something different?
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante I agree! Digital independence is a better term imho
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante what do you think about this argument by @pluralistic in https://pluralistic.net/2026/01/01/39c3/ ?
"And what's got me so excited is that we've got a new coalition in the War on General Purpose Computers: a coalition that includes the digital rights activists who've been on the lines for decades, but also people who want to turn America's Big Tech trillions into billions for their own economy, and national security hawks who are quite rightly worried about digital sovereignty."
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante
In the USA, data sovereignty is what indigenous peoples are aiming for, reclaiming data stolen by colonial powers, restoring access to the rightful owners.Sounds like it means something different in Germany. I think this just varies by geographic location and context.
Or maybe the definition is morphing here and I haven't noticed...
-
@tante To be clear, are you talking about the Sovereign Tech Agency and Sovereign Tech Fund, or something different?
@matt No, I am talking about the political strategy/meme that is very dominant these days
-
I insist on calling it "Digital self-determination" for that and other reasons.
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante Good discussion, and thank you for pointing that out. I hadn’t realised this at all until now, partly because I don’t associate the AfD with expertise in digital matters, and partly because for me, the term is used more in a foreign policy context to highlight our dependence on the US for software products and digital services.
From a human rights perspective, Digital Autonomy is a good term, but perhaps there is another term that fits even better.
I would be very grateful for one, because as a German open-source company, politically opposed to the AfD, we are currently seeing a lot of interest in alternatives (among other things) to US products and the DS term is working well. But naturally we wish to avoid terms that are inappropriate or have right-wing connotations. -
@tante FWIW, Hungary's Fidesz (also a far-right fascist party) is also a big champion of (national) sovereignty. So are many other right-wing parties of the Patriots of Europe group of the EU Parliament.
Heck, AfD - along with a bunch of other parties even further to the right - are part of the Europe of Sovereign Nations Group.
That word is very, very right-wing coded indeed.
@algernon @tante it's core terminology from Carl Schmitt, if you're interested in who first made it a big thing theoretically. Schmitt was sort of the Third Reich's philosopher. Other ideas he championed include stuff like "politics is the distinction between friend and enemy" and "war is the continuation of politics with different means". Very right-wing stuff indeed.
-
You are not wrong, but I get the impression that this is to widen potential vocabulary so the concepts cannot be monopolized. To open the question of, "What do you really mean by that?"
Consider a counter example. (I read your bio and I'm sorry it's an american example - it's just the best one I have at this time in the morning)
When someone from rural Missouri says, "Those city folks." As code for negatively talking about black folk from St. Louis. It doesn't mean the words are bad words by themselves. It mean that person is dog whistling to other racists and that is important context to understand under the surface. Recognizing and questioning intent is important.
Typically the easiest way to undermine someone doing this is to ask, "which people?" It's stupidly simple, but can completely change group dynamics by someone backing off racist intent or doubling down. Which then clues in people who were not hearing this underlying context.
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante if you're truly a luddite, how about you try logging out of your nigger faggot life first by jumping from a bridge? -
I insist on calling it "Digital self-determination" for that and other reasons.
-
I insist on calling it "Digital self-determination" for that and other reasons.
-
I have been warning about the term "digital sovereignty" and how it is right-wing coded and probably can't be salvaged for non-right-wing politics.
The German fascist party AfD now created a European foundation to push their fascist politics further. The name: "Sovereignty Foundation".
Even though tactically it might feel like it makes sense to use the term to get funding, you are integrating right wing politics into your thinking and speaking.
@tante I've, too, been concerned about "sovereignty" being too susceptible to nationalist capture. (Which is probably also why it appeals to certain parties despite often funding more progressive projects?)
I'm also in favor of a different term for the concept that is less so.
However, I also think that it sucks that we yield terms (which actually describes exactly what's intended) to the right-wing national so easily and then are forced to evade
-
-
Well, for what I understand, sovereignty and autonomy are not equivalent.
Sovereignty is a more legal sort of term and stronger than autonomy. Autonomy is part of sovereignty but the opposite is not true. I mean, in order to attain sovereignty you need autonomy, it defines it.@hadon @jwildeboer @tante I would say, autonomy, as the word part "auto" suggests, can apply to people and institutions on their own. You can have autonomy from X.
Sovereignty includes the word "reign". You can not reign without an object, you can have sovereignty over X.
As such, the two words are completely different in the way they describe a power struggle. Focus on autonomy and you describe a situation where you want to be free from something (e.g. Big Tech, or US tech, or whatever). Focus on sovereignty and you (and not someone else) should have power over something, typically via property, law, infrastructure involved.
I think both can still be used from a right-wing perspective of (EU) nationalism, but autonomy is more open to anarchist anti-capitalist principles.
-
It's also a lot more accurate (IMHO) with respect to what the actual goals are/should be.
@datenwolf @kejster @jwildeboer @tante I'm not convinced. I don't want to be "autonomous": I want the capability to *act* in an autonomous/sovereign manner, yes.
The problem is that the right intentionally reduces "sovereign" to isolationism/nationalism. We kinda need to resist that, because they'll otherwise do it to any other term as well ("independence" is a similar candidate).
Maybe throw in an adjective & re-order? "Sovereign digital collaboration".
