This document discusses the politics of technology and how technological artifacts can be political. It defines politics as relating to power, membership, authority, order, and freedom. Technologies can change power relationships in society and exclude certain groups. Specific examples are given, like Robert Moses designing low bridges to exclude buses on Long Island and Baron Haussmann designing wide streets in Paris. The document examines how technologies can be designed to maintain a particular political order and considers whether some technologies are inherently political based on how they structure relationships around centralization, equality, freedom, and authority.

1. Politics of Artifacts
politics of technology
JUS 494: S,T, INEQUALITIES
at Arizona State University
Tempe, Fall Term 2009
Professor: MERLYNA LIM

2. DESIGN .........GOVERNANCE

3. the meaning of politics
politics = ?
no, politics doesn’t equal government

4. politics refers to such things as:
power
membership
authority
order
freedom

5. how a technology can be political?
how does particular technology change “power” relationships in society?
what kind of “authority” is associated with a particular technology?
do particular technologies exclude certain groups of people (“membership”)?
are there technologies that maintain “order”?
are there technologies that limit or enhance our “freedom”?
can technological artifacts have politics?

6. political characteristics can be built into
technology

7. power & authority

8. membership

9. order

10. freedom

11. ways of being political
(langdon winner)
invention, design, or arrangement of a specific
technical device or system becomes a way of settling
an issue in the affairs of a particular community
“inherently political technologies” -- man made
systems that appear to require or to be strongly
compatible with particular kinds of political
relationships

12. robert moses and
the low bridges of long islands

13. baron haussmann &
the wide streets of paris

14. how about this artifact?
can it be political?

16. redesigned to face contemporary urban realities this bench comes standard with
a center arm to discourage overnight stays in its comfortable embrace

19. from three cases
what have we learned?
technology reflects a particular political situation or
political design
the change in power relationships or access/
membership was/is intended
how about the unintended one?

20. a univ california’s mechanical
tomato harvester
$50,000

21. are there technologies that
inherently political?

22. characterizing
political technologies
centralization or decentralization?
egalitarian or inegalitarian?
repressive or liberating?
authoritarian or democratic?

24. technologies and politics
some technologies are always political (inherently)
some technologies are usually associated with
particular political arrangement