Part of my argument that I've been struggling to articulate - like, I've been struggling to find hard evidence for my assertion even though I feel like I 'know' it through long periods of observation - is that the way we use the internet globally has had a tendency to break down the reality of borders. Not in terms of how we govern states, which is ostensibly what a border is for - at least, that's my interpretation now - but in terms of how we identify ourselves. It's not that identity and culture goes away - and it won't, though our identities will probably change, or at least their meanings will - but that borders do very little to manufacture and maintain them.
There are those in power who want to maintain that power by reinforcing certain kinds of us-vs-them rhetoric and, for them, borders are still too useful a tool to ignore. Or, maybe even worse, they're still true believers in their value as cultural identifiers. Whether they do or not, those in power typically try to retain and grow power as a class, and so you have to stay ahead of the cultural curve. In global late-stage capitalism, the nation state is becoming increasingly troubled as the holder of power - it's been waning for decades in the face of the multinational corporation which, maybe appropriately, maybe ironically (or, hell, they don't deny each other, so maybe both) uses the logic and rules of opposing nation states to solidify their own power. It's at least partially a conflict between access to capital and the rise of money versus the right to use force - if you're up to date on globaly politics, you can probably see why this is increasingly a problem.
Those are the anxieties of empire - if you can get ahead of the curve, you can hold power for a new generation. The locus of power is shifting. Gibson writes about the economics and politics of identity and, what's the word - I'm thinking of 'authenticity.' How do we identify? If you look at the demographics for Trump or for "Brexit" - which is insipid, but easy to market - the supporters of Brexit are old and the impulse to remain within the EU community skews largely young. This isn't because the young are really any more savvy than the old, is my guess, but because if you look at why older voters intend to leave, it's an older model of identity politics. They still identify themselves by national borders - they're privvy to an older control model. They're defined by physicality and municipality, where younger people increasingly aren't. The world is smaller for younger people, and they don't want to be held back by fakey-fake physical borders any more than they'd want their internet to be cut off by who's making the page in what country.