The reading of Winters, "Do Artifacts Have Politics?" was a little deep and
complex for myself, but I ended up grasping what was being told. The
article starts off by making a statement exclaiming the increased deployment
of nuclear power facilities must lead society towards authoritarianism.
This is already stating the presence of technology as being political.
When reflecting on some of the claims about technology's impact on society;
such as the factory system, automobile, telephone, radio, television, space program,
and of course nuclear power, the central idea seems to be that these things have all been described as democratizing.
The idea of control over nuclear plants and technology holds to that of a big
responsibility and wouldn't work in a democratic society, is again another
example of technology dictating politics. Politics is defined as
-arrangement of power in human associations as well as the activities that
take place within those arrangements (Winter).
The chapter is divided in two parts, the first one talks about choices and
artifacts being political. Winter states that we all know people have
politics -things do not. He converses on an analogy about a man and those
strange looking low bridges over the parkways in Long Island, and how they
happen to have gotten that way. It seemed odd that the overpasses were
extraordinarily low, having about a nine foot clearance. The questioning of
these two hundred or so, low hanging overpasses on Long Island were design
that way for a reason (Winter).
The design was that of a man who had political ties and clout to help stop
busses used by poor and black people to keep them out of the community of
residents at Long Island. The busses were twelve feet tall and mostly poor
and blacks with lower incomes used the transit system in those times, so
technology from the definition became a politic or political. There are
numerous accounts and examples where technology had some type influence or
power to guide society in certain directions.
Now the second part of the paper dealt with technology being inherently
political. The main concept is when we accept certain technology ; We
should realize and receive it in the same sense of a legislative act or
political founding that establish a framework for public order that will
endure over many generations (Winter).
Inherently political technologies such as nuclear power plants, atom bombs,
nuclear weapons, bring on certain requirements, rules, acts. It lethal
properties influences demand and control in a special tight authoritarian
procedure.
This form of technology has instant political influence.
When we accept the technology we've made the choice that will have a
devastating and lasting affect upon society.
Winter argues and gives analogies about the politics of technology taking on
a authoritarian position because it's to sensitive to take a democratic or
liberating uncentralized control.
Even with regular technology like simple factory work with machines, the
political inherently presence is shown from the subordination of man
following special rules ; to keep production going being ruled by technology.
It's deep-very deep!