Dale Carrico on Technoprogressive Politics

From P2P Foundation
Jump to: navigation, search


Interview of Dale Carrico with the editors of the Meme Therapy blog, focusing on Deliberative Development and the differences between technoprogressivism and transhumanism.

Dale Carrico integrates many p2p-aspects in his techno-progressive vision.


URL = http://memetherapy.blogspot.com/2006/07/dale-carrico-on-technoprogressive.html


Discussion

Do We Need "Technoprogressive" Politics?

In an update on his views, Dale Carrico now says we don't need such technoprogressive politics:

"I think people of the sustainable equitable democratic left benefit greatly from being technoscientifically-literate and technodevelopmentally-concerned, since technoscience issues and change are a primary site of social struggle in our historical moment.

Strictly speaking, I don't think one needs a special "identity" category or movement or program called "technoprogressive" (or anything else) to identify this need and this tendency in particular -- because it is the politics of sustainability, equity-in-diversity, democracy that are prior to and articulate the "technoscience politics" here, there are no "technoscience politics" autonomous from or determinative of that priority -- and also since technodevelopmentally progressive politics has many expressions and mostly plays out at a finer level of detail than is captured by broad ideological formulations and manifestos and that sort of thing anyway.

I would be remiss, I suppose, if I did not point out that in the past I did indeed use that "technoprogressive" term as a shorthand signifier for technoscientifically literate technodevelopmentally progressive politics, and in a way that distressingly did seem to aspire at a kind of position-taking and program. I stopped using it any more when I realized that transhumanists and other Robot Cult types were using it in their PR efforts to mainstream their message.

But the larger lesson I learned from that prior mistake was the technoprogressive term, in creating a space of supposed identification/ dis-identification, was always vulnerable to such an appropriation precisely because it lends itself to a more abstract and inapt "technology politics" involving subcultural signaling (and crass self-promotion/ marketing moves in its Robot Cultic forms) rather than the concrete political questions of stakeholder cost/ risk/ benefit assessment in the moment, sustainability and democratization issues, stratification of distributional effects by class/ race/ gender/, institutional analysis, and the stuff where the rubber really hits the road." (http://amormundi.blogspot.com/2012/12/do-we-need-technoprogressive-politics.html)