Like
most people who follow developments in
American technology, I’ve watched with interest the recent controversies regarding
the Great Techie Invasion of San Francisco.
You
know the story: Each morning rich young programmers are ferried in fancy buses from
the city neighborhoods they’ve gentrified down to Silicon Valley, returning
each evening to spend their mega-salaries in expensive restaurants and exclusive
clubs, pushing aside the regular folks and regular businesses that used to
flourish there.
I
was especially struck by an account of this phenomenon that appeared in the Guardian this past weekend, headlined “Is San
Francisco Losing Its Soul?” Reporter Zöe Corbyn had the smarts to track down
the poet, painter, and publisher Lawrence Ferlinghetti, godfather of the Beats,
who is as apt a symbol of San Francisco’s cherished Outlaw Ethic as you could
ask for.
Lawrence Ferlinghetti |
Corbyn
writes that Ferlinghetti, who moved to the city in 1951, doesn’t feel much at
home there anymore. The art gallery where he’s shown his paintings for twenty
years is closing to make room for a cloud computer startup that’s willing to
pay triple the rent, while shiny new Mercedes crowd the streets of his beloved North Beach. Ferlinghetti
finds himself surrounded by “a souless group of people,” a “new breed” preoccupied
with their smartphones, their money, and themselves. "It is totally
shocking to see Silicon Valley take over the city," he says. "San
Francisco is radically changing and we don't know where it is going to end
up."
Although
I’m generally sympathetic with the sorts of values Ferlinghetti represents and
defends, there’s a subtext to what he’s saying—to what a lot of people are
saying—that misses a larger and important part of the story. That’s the
assumption that there’s something unique about San Francisco, and that its
uniqueness is what’s under attack.
As
someone who graduated from a Peninsula high school in 1968 and who misspent
much of his youth pretending he belonged in the Haight, I’m familiar enough
with Bay Area culture to understand the truth of those sentiments. I think it’s
also true, though, that what’s happening in San Francisco isn’t unique at all,
but rather a completely characteristic and familiar demonstration of the
fundamental nature of technology. In that respect what we’re witnessing today is
San Francisco as microcosm, or San Francisco as metaphor.
When
I speak of the “nature” of technology, I should explain that my definition of
technology is a broad one. I follow the lead of those who think of technology
not as a machine but as a system, one that includes the people who use technologies
and the methods they employ to exploit technology’s powers. Jacques Ellul used
the word “technique” to convey this more holistic view of technology’s nature.
Technique from Ellul’s perspective was not just a methodology, but an ideology,
almost a state of being. The machine is “deeply symptomatic” of
technique, he said. “It represents the ideal toward which technique
strives.”
By
this standard we can consider the techie hordes of Silicon Valley as agents or
carriers of technique, which begins to explain why their invasion of San
Francisco is a manifestation of the nature of technology. Ellul and others
argue that one of technique’s most fundamental characteristics is a relentless
drive toward expansion, and the techie takeover certainly fits that description.
In all the hullabaloo about the demise of the city, we tend to forget that the
techies have already conquered and occupied an entire region to the south of
San Francisco, with much the same impact on real estate and culture that we’re
now noticing in the city. There’s a reason they call it Silicon Valley, after
all.
Even
there, though, we’re talking microcosm. The fact is that the exigencies of
technique are well on their way to overtaking the entire world. China is
one of the latest nations to fall in line.
That
brings me to the second quality of technology’s fundamental character: Aggression.
This is a corollary of the drive to expansion: Whatever stands in the way of
technique’s drive toward completion will be pushed aside, using (to borrow a
phrase from a radically different context) whatever means necessary.
Again,
it’s pretty obvious how the techie invasion of San Francisco fits this
definition. The news reports have made it clear that what’s pissing non-techie
residents of the city off as much as anything is the techie’s attitude. “Arrogant” and “entitled” are words that come
up repeatedly. No accident that libertarianism and Ayn Rand are mainstays of
the techie philosophy. Submit or get out of the way, loser. And again, this is
only a microcosm of what’s happening as technique proceeds on its drive toward
global domination.
San Francisco protesters block a Silicon Valley commuter bus |
The
last quality of technique’s fundamental nature I’ll mention is an almost
obsessive need to control. This, too, is a corollary of the drive to expansion.
As technological systems become larger, more powerful and more complex, the
consequences of a systemic breakdown become more severe. Analysts speak of
“tightly-coupled systems” that can implode when even a tiny element
malfunctions—the paradigmatic example is the blown fuse that causes tens of
millions of people to lose their electrical power. In order to avoid such
events, the masters of technique seek to control as many potentially wayward
elements as possible.
From
what I can gather of news reports in San Francisco (I no longer live on the West
coast) the techies are recasting the neighborhoods they’re invading in their
own image. People who look, think and act differently —wayward elements—are excluded.
What was once diverse is becoming standardized. This is exactly the process we
see occurring in the giganticism that’s so characteristic of large corporations,
including those that rule Silicon Valley. The best way to eliminate the threat
of competition is to absorb it.
Again,
all of this constitutes a phenomenon that’s not just local, but global.
Everywhere you look, traditional ways of life are under assault. There’s
nothing unique about it. San Francisco, you’re being disrupted. Join the club.
Ferlinghetti photo: Sarah Lee, the Guardian, 2006
©Doug Hill, 2014
I do not think that arrogance you describe is a unique trait of technology. The same trait was apparent in groups like the Red Guards in Communist China, or Sturmabteilung (SA) in Nazi Germany. The main trait is juvenile rejection of social conventions and norms, probably a normal state of growing up, that has been captured and elevated to a political ideology by authoritarian elites for the purpose of crushing their political opposition. Those techie hordes are basically foot soldiers smashing political opponents of the corporate and financial oligarchy just like their Red Guard or SA brethren were smashing opponents of Mao Tse tung or Adolf Hitler. Technology is mainly a stage decoration in this battle. Been there seen that and wrote about it here http://wsokol.blogspot.com/2012/09/pictures-from-revolution.html
ReplyDeleteDear Wojtek: Thanks for your comment. One problem: I did not say that the arrogance I described is "a unique trait of technology." I do disagree that technology is "just a stage decoration" in the battles you describe. Technology in my opinion is the motive force, but I recognize that not everyone agrees with that view.
Delete