The Miracle of Technology
A man-made miracle is in the making unless we fail to persuade our leaders to put our interests above theirs.
Emerging technology offers an almost miraculous advance in wellbeing for some. For others, it will prove to be little more than a mirage. This article examines how we can increase the number of people who are set to experience the benefits of some breathtaking new technology in the coming decade.
The Good
Throughout the last two hundred years, the impact of new technology on our personal material wellbeing is close to immeasurable. One indicator is a growth in the number of humans on earth from 1 billion to 7 billion, with the number of people in absolute poverty dropping from around 85% to around 45%. Similar trends can be seen in a variety of terms such as life expectancy, health, and nutrition.
The technological promise has never seemed greater than today. We are already on our way to breathtaking advances. Combining robotics with artificial intelligence already delivers in-house services such as vacuuming, loading dishwashers and washing machines, and intelligent lighting and heating. Automated cars and other transport offer the prospect of lower cost and more convenient transport, reducing the need for individuals and corporations buy expensive equipment such as cars. Green energy and recycling technology has the potential to reverse the potential catastrophe of climate change. Advances in genetic and other medical technology is already delivering new treatments for improved health on a global scale. The depth and breadth of new technology make the treasures in store for us in the coming decade difficult to summarise and predict.
The Bad
Technological advances can only be enjoyed if you have money to enjoy it. So the direction this awesome new technology will take will be determined largely by the percentage of people who have access to money beyond what they need for basic survival.
This point is especially significant because of what technology offers. It is the ability to create more economic output using fewer people to do so. If we do not change our economic model, as we increase our technological prowess, we will increasingly put people out of work. In practice, we have not seen mass unemployment since the financial crash of 2007. Rather we have seen jobs becoming worse paid and more insecure. As job insecurity rises, anxiety and personal self-esteem crash. We see symptoms of this trend throughout the world, nowhere more so than in the United States where deaths from drug abuse have reached record levels.
We have seen an alarming concentration of wealth in ever fewer hands. Just 80 families now own 50% of the entire wealth of the planet. Unless things change, this trend is set to continue. A growing proportion of the population will find themselves living on the breadline, unable to afford new technology and having to be content to witness the ever more amazing riches delivered to the people who have disposable wealth that technology companies will necessarily follow.
Of course, the elephant in the room is the limited resources available on the planet to sustain the ever-growing demand for resources that technological advances use. Climate change has the potential to wipe out literally billions of humans. Some models predict that the unrestrained growth of CO2 emissions could well lead to the complete destruction of the human population on earth as the living resources on which we depend for life are increasingly wiped out. In just the last 50 years, climate change has already contributed to what scientists estimate to be a 60% loss of all species of mammals, fish, and reptiles on earth. Our ability to realise the potential of technology will fail unless we find new ways to recirculate the resources we consume.
The Ugly
We have reached this potential for devastation as our leaders continue to put their interests above ours. The question is, how can we persuade leaders to put our interests first?
There is a bit of a double-edged sword at work. Our leaders get their power from us over economic output. At its extreme, without consumers, there will be no producers. So what we do and how we vote directly impacts the outcomes.
But there are good reasons why we are too likely to support leaders who say the right things but do not do them. In democracies, it is difficult for voters to understand the potential impact of changes that are beyond comprehension. Over the last two decades or so, the middle classes have been separating into a few wealthier and many more poorer. A growing proportion of the population has joined the ranks of people struggling just to survive. It is a tough ask to expect voters to choose leaders who ask them to reduce their consumption to protect the planet when they are struggling to protect themselves.
And yet, if we do not find a new way forward, we are destined to continue to support leaders who promise to follow disproven economic policies that concentrate wealth in too few hands, and that reward consumption even to the point of self-destruction.
The Solution
There are three changes we can demand of our leaders that will assure technological advances do not end up largely bypassing the majority of the population.
1. We can insist our leaders switch the focus of their policies from increasing monetary GDP at any cost to increased human wellbeing. Since human wellbeing is dependent on planetary wellbeing, this new policy necessarily puts a focus on climate change and global resource depletion. But unless we make human wellbeing a primary objective, voters may fail to support change on the basis that the changes will make them even worse off. This may involve replacing GDP as a measure of economic success with human wellbeing. It may involve redirecting our energy sources more quickly to renewable sources. It may involve redirecting methods of production to recirculating resources that are consumed. And more importantly, it should involve policies that empower people to find new and more productive ways to contribute to the economy, such as using some of the wealth generated by technology to fund increasing the numbers of doctors, nurses, care workers, and policy. If we need fewer people to produce output, let’s work out a way for the huge amount of time that is freed up to be used to create a more human, more caring society for everyone.
2. We can switch the system for rewards for businesses. At present, the greatest reward comes from an immature capitalist disregard for anything other than self-interest. We can move to a system that rewards businesses that align with the interests of society overall, with a rapid switch to accounting that succeeds in measuring the level of social responsibility taken by businesses.
3. There are so many advantages of working together and so many costs of fighting with each other. We can switch to a culture that is more in tune with social cohesion, and less obsessed with the exploitation of each other and of resources. For instance, our education system teaches children how to build bombs without teaching them how to avoid needing to use them.
Conclusion
It may be too much to ask voters to elect leaders unless they promise to improve outcomes. But it has become increasingly rare for politicians to match their words with deeds. So let’s instead vote for leaders who commit to a new set of principles in the way we run society, committing to a fairer and more ecologically aware society so that everyone can benefit from the technological miracle that is already in sight on the horizon.
