Blog | Events | Multimedia | About | Purpose | Programs | Publications | Staff | Contact | Join   
     Login      Register    

Support the IEET




The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States. Please give as you are able, and help support our work for a brighter future.

Via PayPal




Technoprogressive? BioConservative? Huh?
Quick overview of biopolitical points of view









Personhood Beyond the Human Conference whats new at ieet
Imagination Experiment: Visualizing Transformative Tech

From Mars to the Multiverse

The singularity: merging human/machine to achieve immortality

Feel the Pulse - 2013 MIT Image Award Winner

CubeSats: Tiny satellites work at MIT, U. Mich.

Should Transhumanists Abandon the Corporatist Capitalist model?

The Far Futures Project

Mixed News from Space

Woman who lost limbs to flesh-eating bacteria gets bionic hands

Present Shock- explained in 15 minutes


ieet books

eGods: Faith versus Fantasy in Computer Gaming
Author
by William Sims Bainbridge


comments

Peter Wicks on 'Should Transhumanists Abandon the Corporatist Capitalist model?' (May 21, 2013)

CygnusX1 on 'Should Transhumanists Abandon the Corporatist Capitalist model?' (May 21, 2013)

Peter Wicks on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 21, 2013)

dobermanmac on 'Should Transhumanists Abandon the Corporatist Capitalist model?' (May 21, 2013)

Intomorrow on 'Will the Catholic Bishops Decide How You Die?' (May 20, 2013)







Subscribe to IEET News Lists

Daily News Feed

Longevity Dividend List

Catastrophic Risks List

Biopolitics of Popular Culture List

Technoprogressive List

Trans-Spirit List



Also check out technoprogressive multimedia on Thoughtware.tv

Hottest Articles of the Last Month

Life in the 2040s: nanofactories, flying cars, household robots, more
by Dick Pelletier
Apr 30, 2013
(6425) Hits
(1) Comments

Ten Responses to the Technological Unemployment Problem
by Jon Perry
May 1, 2013
(5382) Hits
(2) Comments

Noam Chomsky on Libertarians
Andy80o
Apr 27, 2013
(3152) Hits
(15) Comments

Organ, tissue replacement could end aging by mid-2020s
by Dick Pelletier
May 14, 2013
(3131) Hits
(0) Comments

Radical life extension: living a 1,000 year lifespan
by Dick Pelletier
May 7, 2013
(2685) Hits
(0) Comments

Imagine No Religion. On Facebook.
by Valerie Tarico
May 4, 2013
(2620) Hits
(150) Comments



IEET > Security > Vision > Technoprogressivism > Former > Dale Carrico

Print Email permalink (4) Comments (4388) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


Technology Needs Democracy, Democracy Needs Technology


Dale Carrico
Dale Carrico
Amor Mundi

Posted: Feb 20, 2006

Over the years of my lifetime, conservative ideologues have seemed to frame their usual corporatist, militarist, deregulatory schemes more and more in apparently revolutionary terms.  They seem to hyperventilate ever more conspicuously and insistently about their customary money-grabs and power-grabs in the faux-revolutionary cadences of “freedom on the march” and with faux-revolutionary visions of “free markets” surging, swarming, crystallizing, and well-nigh ejaculating the whole world over.  And over these same years of my lifetime, the democratic left—already demoralized, perhaps, by the failures of long-privileged revolutionary vocabularies—seemed almost to sleepwalk into the rather uninspiring position of defending the fragile institutional attainments of imperfectly representative, imperfectly functional welfare states in apparently conservative terms.  They have struggled reasonably but too-often ineffectually, spellbound with worry over the real harms to real people that have accompanied the long but apparently irresistable dismantlement of the social democratic status quo, such as it was.

This was and somewhat remains a problem for the radical democratic left.  On the one hand, there appears to be an ongoing failure to take seriously the vast resources and breathtaking organizational discipline that can be mobilized by the real desperation of religious and market fundamentalist elites panic-stricken by global secularization and its threats to the traditional, parochial, and “natural” vocabularies that have legitimized hitherto their otherwise unearned privileges and authority.  And on the other hand, there has simply been a failure of nerve and, worse, imagination in the fraught efforts to formulate an appealing post-marxist revolutionary democratic vocabulary that could inspire people to struggle for long-term general emancipation rather than short-term personal gain.

For me, of course, such a new revolutionary vocabulary would need to be a palpably technoprogressive one.  It would consist of the faith and demand that global technological development be beholden to the interests of all its stakeholders as they themselves express these interests, that existing technological powers be deployed to redress injustice, ameliorate suffering, diminish danger, remediate the damage of prior and ongoing technological development (especially the legacies of unsustainable extractive and petrochemical industrialization), and finally that new technologies be developed to incomparably emancipate, empower, and democratize the world. 

Conservatism cannot appropriate a technoprogressive vision, since any conception of progress that insists on both its technical and social dimensions will indisputably threaten established powers.  But there is no question that conservatives will take up technodevelopmental politics for their own ends.  Indeed, conservative military-industrial technophiles, neoliberal technocrats, and global corporate futurists already largely define the terms in which technodevelopmental politics are playing out in the contemporary world.  Conservative technodevelopmental politics in its corporate-conservative mode will continue to insist that “progress” is a matter of the socially-indifferent accumulation of useful inventions to be enjoyed first and most by the elites with whom particular conservatives identify.  And in its bioconservative modes conservative technodevelopmental politics will continue to indulge in daydreams of unenforceable bans on scientific research and of blanket disinventions of late modernity (trying all the while not to think too much about the genocidal die-offs entailed in such pastoral fantasies) on the part of deep ecologists and anti-choice activists. 

Not to put too fine a point on it, I believe that without democracy technology will likely destroy the living world, and that without technology democracy will likely wither into irrevelance and so destroy the human world.  But I believe no less that a radical democratic politics of global technological development will likely emancipate humanity at last.  Radical democracy needs to take up its revolutionary stance again, to gain and remake the world for us all before the world is utterly lost to us all.


Dale Carrico Ph.D. was a fellow of the IEET from 2004 to 2008 and is a lecturer in the Department of Rhetoric at the University of California at Berkeley.
Print Email permalink (4) Comments (4389) Hits •  subscribe Share on facebook Stumble This submit to reddit submit to digg submit to Twitter


COMMENTS


What does anything in this article even mean? This is the most complex and confusing article I have ever forced myself to read. I’m not saying that intelligent writing is a bad thing, but you went way overboard here. It almost looks like you typed normal sentences and then “thesaurused” the shit out of it to make yourself look impressive.





Wow…. I’m really impressed.  But probably not as much as Dale himself, I’m sure.





Klompus,

The man has a Ph.D..  He’s not going to write in the People Magazine rhetoric that’s geared to a 5th grade level.





Technology has gamed democracy and we are fucked.
Our fucked up world that got way through lies. Truth would unfuck it but lies seem to win because they have money and organization
and whores orgs.  As society gets more complicated the truth gets more complicated and you have to be an educated and disciplined thinker to understand it.  The liars can keep us dumb in the first place and then the lies are easier to win with.  Specialization and division of labor help the liars too
because the truth about society means the truth about so many different areas and specialties and nobody or very few can understand all the different aspects enought to get the big picture.  In the simple life a guy had confidence in this own ability to understand the world around him and the big issues.  So indirectly technological advance is an evil.  Just like it leads to the atom bomb it also leads to mass stupidity on the most vital issues of the day.
The most important truths can’t be understood by specialization and division of labor even tho those things advance technological knowledge.
OTOH lying greatly benefits from division of labor.  Look at a movie which is a huge deception resulting from the work of many technicians.  The news media and think tanks also.  Not only technically but morally it is easier with division of labor.  If your job in the evil machine is just a small part it is easy to rationalize what you do as just making a living and easier to not know what the corporation that employs you is really doing to the world and to people in the community.  The same with being a shareholder in a corp.  If you don’t want to know how they make profits it’s easy not to know.  Which is the same as easy to believe a lie because of specialization.  Democracy is another way to avoid knowing so you can believe that your small part doesn’t make you guilty of the large crimes of the whole.  So different from the primitive villiage life where what you do is right there; where your word is important; where you must face fear and be brave for the whole community every day; where the coward, liar or thief is immediately found out. Not so in the modern world where greed is lauded as a virtue and private property becomes a religion. MINE MINE MINE. You hear it all day long. This cowardice is easy not to know.  So here we are.  Perhaps the only thing that can bring back the truth is the collapse of technology and a return to primitive life. It seems that truth can’t compete with lies in the technologically advanced society.





YOUR COMMENT (IEET's comment policy)

Login or Register to post a comment.

Next entry: The Open Future

Previous entry: Rockin the Boskone

HOME | ABOUT | FELLOWS | STAFF | EVENTS | SUPPORT  | CONTACT US
SECURING THE FUTURE | LONGER HEALTHIER LIFE | RIGHTS OF THE PERSON | ENVISIONING THE FUTURE
CYBORG BUDDHA PROJECT | AFRICAN FUTURES PROJECT | JOURNAL OF EVOLUTION AND TECHNOLOGY

RSSIEET Blog | email list | newsletter | Podcast
The IEET is a 501(c)3 non-profit, tax-exempt organization registered in the State of Connecticut in the United States.

Contact: Executive Director, Dr. James J. Hughes,
Williams 119, Trinity College, 300 Summit St., Hartford CT 06106 USA 
Email: director @ ieet.org     phone: 860-297-2376