Greetings
It is not possible to compromise between technology and freedom, because technology is by far the more powerful social force and continually encroaches on freedom. So it goes in the conflict between technology and freedom.
Imagine the case of two neighbours, each of whom at the outset owns the same amount of land, but one of who is more powerful than the other. The powerful one demands a piece of the other’s land. The weak one refuses. The powerful one says, “OK, let’s compromise. Give me half of what I asked.” The weak one has little choice but to give in. Some time later the powerful neighbour demands another piece of land, again there is a compromise, and so forth. By forcing a long series of compromises on the weaker man, the powerful one eventually gets all of his land. So it goes in the conflict between technology and freedom.
Let us explain why technology is a more powerful social force than the aspiration for freedom. For example, consider motorized transport. A walking man could go where he pleased, go at his own pace without any restrictions. When motor vehicles were introduced they appeared to increase man’s freedom – no one had to have an automobile if he didn’t want one, and those who did could travel much faster.
But the introduction of motorized transport changed society in such a way as to restrict man’s freedom. When automobiles became numerous, it became necessary to regulate their use extensively. In a car one cannot just go where one likes at one’s own pace, one’s movement is governed by the flow of traffic and by traffic laws. One is tied down by various obligations: license requirements, driver test, renewing registration, insurance, maintenance required for safety, monthly payments on purchase price.
Sounds familiar?
Another reason why technology is such a powerful social force is that, within the context of a given society, technological progress marches in only one direction; it can never be reversed. Once a technical innovation has been introduced, people usually become dependent on it, unless it is replaced by some still more advanced innovation. Thus the system can move in only one direction, toward greater technologization. Technology repeatedly forces freedom to take a step back — short of the overthrow of the whole technological system.
This brings me to genetic engineering. We often lie to ourselves that it is for the betterment of society, that more lives can be saved and that we have restrictions that would prevent genetic experiments from being applied to human beings in ways as to threaten freedom and dignity.
Still, the technology would remain waiting. Sooner or later the social arrangement would break down. And it already has – it has begun to invade our sphere of freedom – we now have synthetic limbs, artificial organs and soon we will have mutants and genetic freaks that can run faster, jump higher and become so strong we cannot control them. And this would be irreversible.
So what can we do?
Remember the weak neighbour earlier? Suppose now that the strong neighbour gets sick, so that he is unable to defend himself. The weak neighbour can force the strong one to give him his land back, or he can kill him. If he lets the strong man survive and only forces him to give his land back, he is a fool, because when the strong man gets well he will again take all the land for himself.
The only sensible alternative for the weaker man is to kill the strong one while he has the chance.
In the same way, while the industrial system is sick we must destroy it. If we compromise with it and let it recover from its sickness, it will eventually wipe out all of our freedom.
So are you ready?
