BY MIKE MAGEE
In George Packer’s classic 2013 New Yorker article titled “Changing the World: Silicon Valley Transfers its Slogans — and its Money — to the Realm of Politics,” there is a passage that deserves careful re-reading now a decade later.
Packer shares an encounter with a technician in his 20s criticizing his younger colleagues who said, “Many see their social responsibility fulfilled by their companies, not by social or political action. It is remarkably convenient that they can achieve all of their goals just by getting started. They actually think that Facebook is going to be the panacea for many global problems. It’s not cynicism, it’s arrogance and ignorance.
The evaluation of the packer at the time was ‘When the financiers say they are doing God’s work providing cheap credit, and the oilmen claim to be patriots making the country energy independent, no one takes them too seriously – that’ It’s a fact that their motivation is profit, but when tech entrepreneurs describe their lofty goals, there’s no smile or wink.
Or, as others might put it, “They believe their own bullshit.” While many of us are currently focused on issues of values, fairness and justice, those living in the shadows of Silicon Valley see the challenge as inefficiency and incompetence, and the solution which lends itself to technological engineering.
In 2013, a Belarusian immigrant student at Stanford named Evgeny Morozov coined the term “solutionism” for those who have an unshakeable faith in high-tech solutions. A decade later, Evgeny is now Visiting Scholar in Liberation Technology at Stanford, and a colleague of Larry Diamond (director of Stanford’s Center on Democracy) who coined the term “liberation technology”.
Stanford describes their purpose thus: “The Internet, cell phones and other forms of ‘liberation technology’ allow citizens to express their opinions, mobilize protests and expand the horizons of freedom. However, autocratic governments also learn to master these technologies. Ultimately, the struggle between democrats and autocrats will not just depend on technology, but on political organization and strategy.
Evgeny naturally bridges this world of individual entrepreneurship and public policy. He is currently focusing on AGI (artificial general intelligence) and its interface with its original concept of neoliberal “solutionism”. He thinks we’ve all been sold a bill of goods that technology is inevitable and beneficial, and that it will expand our intelligence and fix our inhumanity.
Evgeny says it’s already clear that the rise of entrepreneurial capitalism and destructive profit (not to mention massive income inequality and the segregation of tech billionaires) is changing representative democracy and replacing it with libertarians on steroids .
It’s helpful to remember that we’ve been down this road before. For example, it was none other than Margaret Thatcher who said, “There is no society.” How has this worked in the post-Brexit period for the UK?
If she were alive today, she’d probably agree with AGI fans that private beats public, efficiency solves social problems, and adapting to change is much faster and faster. easier than addressing major weaknesses in human or societal behavior.
The recent “boom and bust” cycle in health technology has confirmed the lie that “really smart people” as opposed to venture capitalists are driving the information technology revolution. In the vast majority of cases, in health care and beyond, “the charm offensive of heavily subsidized services” is followed by a “nasty retreat, with overly dependent users and agencies bearing the costs … »
In 2021, health technology succeeded in breaking all records. The digital health market gained 43% more investors than in 2020, with $30.7 billion – a 107% increase – in venture capital. By 2022, the 85 companies dedicated to the field had collective valuations that had tripled to $73 million.
Did these ideas define a category? Were they durable? Have investors been a source of expertise or sound advice? Did any of these products result in impactful change that would equitably alter the life trajectory of the humans served? Have they alleviated people’s fear and anxiety? Have they expanded hope and community engagement. Did they make America and Americans healthy?
Not according to Evgeny. He says, “The open agenda is, in many ways, the opposite of equality and justice. They think anything that helps you circumvent institutions is, by default, empowering or liberating. You might not be able to pay for your healthcare or insurance, but if you have an app on your phone that warns you that you need to exercise more or that you’re not eating healthy enough, they think ‘they solve the problem.’
Mike Magee MD is a medical historian and a regular contributor to THCB. He is the author of CODE BLUE: Inside the medical-industrial complex.
