Technology absolutely has an ideology. All technology produces winners and losers, complicates previous tasks while making some easier, and overlaps heavily with futurism. If tech doesn’t have an ideology, then we would say Luddites and Amish are merely social clubs, and not social movements.
people do ideology, not tech. tech can be used to serve an ideological purpose, but this does not mean that tech has an ideology, it is the people using it that do. To quote michael parenti:
“It is said that cameras don’t lie, but we must remember that liars use cameras.” - Michael Parenti
Luddites and the amish refusing to use tech is not due to tech discriminating them, but because their ideology discriminates tech, sometimes as absurd as saying that tech is the devil.
tech is built on laws of nature, think of gravity, does gravity act differently on an anarchist than it does on a libertarian? absolutely not.
I’m not advocating for primitivism or reactionary views against using it. I’m trying to point out that people aren’t going to embrace or accept this technology as much when it does more harm than good and will continue to do so just as the existence of Linux or other open-source projects doesn’t impede capitalism or it’s destruction in anyway. As this tech is being utilized in an ideological purpose, it will always be utilized more effectively and powerfully than any open-source case under the dominant ideology who controls the economy.
If there is a clear, distinct use-case of this technology that benefits our cause and doesn’t harm workers, great! The one example of it being used in that news channel rainpizza mentioned is reasonable.
Technology absolutely has an ideology. All technology produces winners and losers, complicates previous tasks while making some easier, and overlaps heavily with futurism. If tech doesn’t have an ideology, then we would say Luddites and Amish are merely social clubs, and not social movements.
people do ideology, not tech. tech can be used to serve an ideological purpose, but this does not mean that tech has an ideology, it is the people using it that do. To quote michael parenti:
Luddites and the amish refusing to use tech is not due to tech discriminating them, but because their ideology discriminates tech, sometimes as absurd as saying that tech is the devil.
tech is built on laws of nature, think of gravity, does gravity act differently on an anarchist than it does on a libertarian? absolutely not.
I’m not advocating for primitivism or reactionary views against using it. I’m trying to point out that people aren’t going to embrace or accept this technology as much when it does more harm than good and will continue to do so just as the existence of Linux or other open-source projects doesn’t impede capitalism or it’s destruction in anyway. As this tech is being utilized in an ideological purpose, it will always be utilized more effectively and powerfully than any open-source case under the dominant ideology who controls the economy.
If there is a clear, distinct use-case of this technology that benefits our cause and doesn’t harm workers, great! The one example of it being used in that news channel rainpizza mentioned is reasonable.