THE TECH OFFENSIVE

Modern life is unthinkable without technology. Technology is unthinkable without a thorough understanding of the basic sciences. Basic science is unthinkable without humanity’s passionate pursuit to understand creation/universe. Conclusion; it is inherent curiosity embedded in the human spirit that is at the root of it all! However, a problematic has arisen in late modernity. Technology, which is nothing more than the manipulation of nature, mostly to our temporal flimsy whims, has set up a formidable regime that is not always congruent to the essential needs (material or otherwise) of collective humanity. As the old man of wisdom once put it: ‘Our age is characterized by the perfection of means and the confusion of ends’, Albert Einstein! According to the regime of technology, the purpose of society is no more humanity itself; rather it is to facilitate the reproductive process of incremental technology. Hardly a technology extinguishes itself by desire. It does so only when it becomes obsolete; in other words, it goes away when a more ‘efficient’ technology pushes it out. Here is what puzzles us: Why the human obsession with ‘tech for tech’s sake’? When investigating such important issues, one is forced to start from the basics. What kind of a society allows technique to take over our whole imagination? Technique was coined by the Jacques Ellul (French), one of the early articulators of the tech problematic; ‘The Technological Society’, 1954. Incidentally, Ellul, who remains one of the very few critical thinkers of the 20th century, met his wife while they were both demonstrating against fascist sympathizers of Ethiopia’s occupation. ‘Think globally, act locally’ is a phrase he coined and lived by, almost a century ago! Why is technique undermining harmonious existence amongst the peoples of this planet? Why is the global sheeple a sucker for technique? Why is the whole organized humanity failing to interrogate the proliferation of technique, particularly those that are increasingly undermining life itself, not only that of humans? Ellul argued: ‘Technique, broadly conceived to include, not merely machines and other technical devices, but the whole complex of rationally ordered methods for making any human activity more efficient - has outgrown human control, even if we are able to govern individual technologies. This technical complex has taken on a life of its own, threatening human freedom and responsibility and suppressing the necessary conditions under which a solution to this predicament seems possible.’ The fact that the modern world system is organized around the core motive of profit has something to do with the unbridled ascendance of technique. In the ideology of the profit system, everything is secondary, including life! This can only sound strange to those uninitiated/unincorporated to modern existence! But the system has systemically done away with such societies. Even in remotest Africa, traditional gods are now replaced with the deity of unitarymonetary god. Ethiopia is one of the recent examples. This is one of the reasons why critical inquires are rendered experimentally futile. As we have been repeating ad nauseam, the greed system is not interested in life, hence, has been more than willing to facilitate the flourishing of technique, without any socially constructed restricting bounds! Otherwise, issues like climate change would have taken center stage. But according to the bible of the greed system, the economy has to remain sacrosanct. If truth be told, the very word ‘economy’ is intended to mislead. Will there be an economy if the species Homo sapiens was nonexistent? Systemically muzzling discourse on technique is probably what led Theodore Kaczynski to take matters in his own hands. Ted, an American mathematical prodigy (the youngest Assistant Professor in Uc-berkeley’s history, at the age of 25) decided to raise awareness, by selectively and terrorist-ically, attacking some of the centers/individuals he deemed were active protagonist/prototypes of technique. Ted, commonly known as the ‘Unabomber’, is currently serving eight consecutive life sentences, without parole, in Colorado. He is 76 years old. After abandoning academia in 1971, Ted tried to live in harmony with nature in the wilderness of Montana. During these years, he concocted several homemade bombs and started sending them to individuals/institutions, to make his point, so to speak. Ted was finally found out by the authorities, after he forced the publication of his manifesto; ‘The Industrial Society and Its Future’ on the major US newspapers (NYT & WAPO). To be sure, Ted himself was a victim of a brutal psychological experiment (‘a purposely brutalizing psychological experiment’, according to insiders) enthusiastically conducted by the Frankenstein technicians when he was still a young student at Harvard. In 2005, Ted tried to donate two rare books to the African Studies Department of Northwestern, probably as a redeeming gesture, but the university rejected his offer. It was Northwestern University, which received his first mail bomb in 1978. Without delving too much, we can mention some of the really thorny issues associated with technique. First, technique is diabolically incremental. But increased sophistication only results in a highly interdependent fragile setup, particularly in the realm of human societies. Secondly, it is blind about consequences. Whether non-renewable resources are available or not for its continuous reproduction, is not an issue as far as technique is concerned, to say nothing about impacts on the biosphere, etc. The third one is its obsession with irrational efficiency. Efficiency is a very relative concept, particularly as it applies to the domain of the natural. But to technique, efficiency is its very sustenance, as desired by its putative human handlers. If the creator/creation wanted us to be more efficient than we are today, may be we would have had ten eyes and twelve legs or a brain the size of the universe, etc., etc. Therefore, in nature, efficiency is a stupidly ridiculous idea, but technique is not worried about nature. Implanting chip in one’s body might be efficient, as far as technique/dominant interests are concerned. Such things, for instance, can control/facilitate the sheeple’s life! Cumulatively, the above factors create an environment where resilience is lost and is replaced by frightening fragility! Herein lies the main critique in regards to technique or the technosphere (a la Dimitry Orlov). Like it or not, technique/technosphere enabled collapse is almost inevitable! Humanity might survive its own destructive technique if it starts to obey the ways of the natural. Perhaps nature mimicking is the only way out of the current morass of greed and destruction. Unfortunately, in late modernity, technique still reigns supreme!