showed how groups could suck power into themselves from networks, along invisible lines, and animate themselves as if by connection to electricity. The protesters and terrorists understood power that existed simply because of connectivity. They understood how easy it was to connect. And so they had an instinct that eluded the comfortable men in the palaces. The usual reaction of authorities - Round up the usual suspects - didn’t work because, as Castells noted, “The usual suspects were networks.” You couldn’t arrest a network. 3. Before we can go much further in figuring out how network power might be used - to close up those six worrisome paradoxes, to create massive new companies (or invest in them), to rebuild our politics — ] think we need a picture of sorts in our heads of this new landscape. What does a network look like? How does it’s design affect its operation? Yes, it’s true you can’t arrest a network. But can you say something about how it’s different? Can you spot the parts that are dangerous? When someone like Castells says to us, “Power is moving,” what does that mean exactly? Where is it going? What I want to do now is begin to assemble an image of a network, and to show what that sort of linked design tells us about where we are now and where we're going. Then, with such a picture, firmly in our minds, we can ask just what these networks are for, after all, and how they might be used. It is an old chestnut of historians and anthropologists that power - the ability to make or cause things to happen - is often determined by structure. When I say, “Superpower” I am painting a picture of the international system with a single word. “Highway,” does the same - and tells you something about logistics, trucks, economic power. Or “City.” This is why “org charts” have such a decisive power. Think of the map of power in your family or your office or a nation. Who makes the decisions? Why? The way we bottle up our lives in firms or congresses or universities fl