Talk itself generates communities and power independent of fixed interests

Evidence

For instance, it is well known that Luhmann refers in his systems theory not to people, but to networks of communications. This does not mean that social systems could exist without people (or psychic systems), but that the meaningful reproduction and determination of meaning is a self-referential process determined by subsequent sequences of communication rather than by the will of individual human beings, the concerted efforts of groups of human beings, or some external force. Luhmann’s notion of meaning has often been overlooked or misinterpreted, with the result that his insistence on systems of communication rather than people has been seen as anti-humanist or as evidence that he simply and wilfully ignored the importance of people. This is a fundamental misreading of Luhmann’s intentions. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 20 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

According to this, transmission of selection outputs means precisely the reproduction of those outputs in simplified form abstracted from the requirements of their initial configuration. It is precisely in view of this simplification and abstraction that symbols are needed to replace the concrete beginning, the initial link in the selection chain. For this purpose communication media develop symbolically generalized codes which then act as shared orientations for their operations. Yet each subsequent phase of the process continues itself to be self-selection. Communication media consequently provide the ability to orient around widely different situations while, at the same time, enabling particular (non-identical) selections to be made. It is only under this basic condition that power, too, functions as a communication medium. It organizes social situations through double selectivity. Therefore, the selectivity of alter must be distinguished from that of ego, for very different problems are raised in relation to their respective positions, particularly in the case of power. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 593 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

In what measure sociability realizes to the full the abstraction of the forms of sociological interaction otherwise significant because of their content and gives them—now turning about themselves, so to speak—a shadow body is revealed finally in that most extensive instrument of all human common life, conversation. The decisive point is expressed in the quite banal experience that in the serious affairs of life men talk for the sake of the content which they wish to impart or about which they want to come to an understanding—in sociability talking is an end in itself; in purely sociable conversation the content is merely the indispensable carrier of the stimulation, which the lively exchange of talk as such unfolds. — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 381 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Accepting self-interest as public speech’s only form can be fatal for communities — Nina Eliasoph, Avoiding politics: how Americans…, 160; Social systems reproduce through self-referential communication, not individual will — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 20; In sociable conversation talk becomes an end in itself, not a vehicle for content — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 381 (+5 more)

Broader Connections

• Social systems reproduce through self-referential communication, not individual will #corroborates (0.82) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 20
• In sociable conversation talk becomes an end in itself, not a vehicle for content #expands (0.75) — Georg Simmel, on individuality and social forms_…, 381
• Power functions as a communication medium through double selectivity between alter and ego. #qualifies (0.75) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 593
• Power operates through indirect communication, not direct action #expands (0.72) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 604