Technology, Politics, and Democracy

1. Technology is political. Social forces shape technology. When technology has been shaped into something permanent it becomes a social force that in return shapes society. Technology is society made durable. Those who make technology often claim that it could not have been designed another way. There isn’t a predetermined path of technology, it doesn’t grow by itself. The desires and interests (or ignorances) of those who control the design process are what shape technology.

[If technology shapes the options and possibilities for society we need to have democratic control of how we make or standardize our technologies if we want to have a democratic society. What effect for women &workers when technological design is controlled by men &capitalists?

2. Some places that the technology activists might be aware of technology:

2a New Technologies. For new technologies being introduced we can advocate the “precautionary principle”. There are very few regulatory processes for new technologies unless they threaten the security of the state, for example encryption or communications technologies of one to many are regulated. New foods or drugs are often regulated. Most countries try to subsidize research and development and hope to improve their economic position in the world economy by developing new technologies.

2b Standardization of Technologies. Technologies are often standardized through government or industry organizations. Standardization allows devices to work or interoperate with one another in a larger region. For example, electricity plugs or computer cables. When standardization occurs, such as is happening in seemingly dull meetings about tech standards in the European Union, some possibilities & some people, are “standardized in”, while other possibilities and people can be “standardized out”. Consider what standardization might mean for people with difabilties ( “different abilities” shortened to “difability”). When people with abilities that are different than the standard they could be disabled by the standard (the word disabled is used in this sentence as a verb: to disable someone). Through standardization the extension of technological zones are determined and also who might benefit or loose out because of these zones.

2c Intellectual “Property”. Many new devices are based in an idea more than an object. These ideas are being territorialized as property by large corporations so that simple things that can easily be spread, such as software, or new drugs to help treat AIDS and are then being withheld from the public. The huge AIDS epidemic in Africa has forced the issue of medical patents on new drugs to be talked about. Some corporations are attempting to steal the intellectual “property” of indigenous plants, native peoples and developing countries.

References

Political Machines: Governing the Technological Society by Andrew Barry, published in 2001 by Athlone Press. Particularly see chapter 8, which is specifically about the direct action anti-roads movement in Britain during the 1990s.

Information Feudalism: Who owns the Knowledge Economy by Peter Drahos with John Braitwaite published 2002 This book explains in graphic detail how corporate multinationals have stolen the future.

See also publication of Development Dialogue 1999:1-2 The ETC century: Erosion, Technological Transformation and Corporate Concentration in the 21^st Century by Pat Roy Mooney. Some information locatable on http://www.etcgroup.org (previously known as the RAFI organization)

For some helpful strategies for dealing with biotech PR blitzes see http://www.smartmeme.org

3. Public awareness of technology and what kind of fears that people have about new technologies is now being studied by sociology. The public is very concerned about some technologies particularly genetic manipulation and is unaware of others. Many corporate strategies involve promoting the possibilities of these new technologies as a “great hope”, for example being able to feed the world, new breakthroughs in medicine or computing. Public relations is very important to these companies.

References

See publications page of IEPPP, Lancaster University http://domino.lancs.ac.uk/ieppp/home.nsf/ and search for publication Wising Up: The Public and New Technologies a report by Brian Wynne, Phil McNaughten, and Robin Grove-White. See also Uncertain World: Genetically Modified Organisms, Food, and Public Opinion in Britain.

4. Nanotechnology is the manipulation of substances and building of devices at the extremely small level, around the size of molecules and just a bit larger. These processes are still being developed and the majority of the research and development money is coming from government grants. Some insurance companies have said that nanotechnology might not be insurable because it poses unquantifiable risks. There is no regualtory process for nanotechnology.

There are three stages that the introduction of nanotechnology into society is likely to go through unless it is stopped.

ONE (already beginning to happen)

Already happening is the use of nanotechnological processes to make production processes for existing technologies more cost efficient. Also nano-sized particles of normal substances are being made because at this size the particles have different physical properties. Particles at this size exhibit different chemical properties and some may be toxic. There have been no safety studies and yet these products are being released into the market, sunscreens, Loriel skin care products, Gap jeans stainless fabrics, self cleaning windows, etc. All of the magor multinationals (all the fortune 500 companies) are involved in researching or developing new products involving nano-technology.

TWO (estimated three to five years in the future)

The first independent nano-sized devices (not just nanoparticles) will be developed and sold. This will either be in the form of nanotechnology robots or nano-biotech (which is when biotechnological manipulations of genetic code are done with nanotechnology).

THREE (estimated five to ten years in the future)

Nanodevices and products will be introduced into every level of society and start to have wide ranging and unpredictable effects on the social structure. There will almost certainly also be saftey and environmental concerns. Grey Goo is the phrase coined to talk about a runaway nanotechnology self assembler device that by transforming matter at the molecular level turned everything in its expanding path into grey goo.

It is important to remember that use of nanotechnology has already begun and that by the time we can easily notice its presence (including its environmental and civil society effects) it will be firmly established in the economy, difficult to uproot. By the time we can see it coming it will already be here. Besides environmental and health risks the major threat of nanotechnologies are how they might change the balance of power in society. Large multinational corporations can use them to gain unprecedented amounts of power over civil society. The economies of developing world nations might quickly be overrun, decimated. The US military and other militaries are very interested in spying, surveillance and other nanotechnology uses.

References: See http://www.etcgroup.org

In particular see the new ETC report released May/June of this year available at their website Communique #85: Nanotech news in Living Colour

See also the May 2003 special issue of the Ecologist Magazine with cover story and explanation on nanotechnology threats to global democracy.

This briefing put together by GreenAction for the European PGA 2004 conference, held in Eastern Europe