Resenha "Tecnociência Solidária: um manual estratégico" em inglês.

The book “Tecnociência Solidária: Um Manual Estratégico” (English: “Solidarity Technoscience: A Strategic Manual”) has, as its central question, that intellectuals of the Pensamento Latino-Americano em Ciência, Tecnologia e Sociedade (English: Latin American Thought in Science, Technology and Society - PLACTS) have been working on since the 1970s: how to face the peripheral condition of the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean? This is a structural condition inherited from a colonial past, which includes dependence in relation to developed countries in many aspects, such as cultural, technological, economic, social, political, and science and scientific research. To answer this question, this book draws from Latin American intellectuals such as Jorge Núñez, Andrew Feenberg, István Mészáros and Paul Singer, as well as from Marxism and structural economists from the Comissão Econômica para América Latina e Caribe (English: Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean CEPAL).

This book argues that it is possible to change. It recognizes technologies more as a means of building lifestyles, interests and values (for example, efficiency and power), and reflects upon on the catastrophic future of humanity, which would be associated with the ideal of technological progress.

The criticism of the hegemonic economic model, the one based on the “Theory of Innovation”, and of those who share Keynesianism and/or neo-Schumpeterianism is notorious. However, Dagnino (2019) calls upon the “technoscience” concept. It is an essential means for humanity to rebuild the values and principles, which are currently in disuse, such as solidarity, self-management, democracy, citizenship, and respect for the environment. These were largely hampered by predatory, excluding, denial, ndividualistic, and hegemonic ideas.

One of the outstanding messages of this book is that there is no way for an intellectual or scientist to be neutral towards society's problem. The book also does not agree with the perception that clings to empirical data, which are often associated with a positivist and reductionist bias. This makes the reader discover that “quality” is not always synonymous with “relevance”.

Despite having a Marxist bias, the author criticizes real socialism and he makes implicit the fact that the left parties need an update, as it is no longer a matter of defending an old-fashioned revolution (such as the one in the USSR). When criticizing this aspect of Marxism, the book refers to the misinterpretations with respect to the concept of “productive forces” of Karl Marx, which excludes the scientific community from them. Given the myths of neutrality and determinism of technoscience that permeate the social imagination, neither social democracy (with its ideal of technological progress) nor orthodox Marxism (with the Stalinist-Leninist-Trotskyist dogma) would be able to respond to those problems of Latin America and the Caribbean, as it should not be done anywhere in the world, even with the specificities of each country.

Dagnino (2019) offers the new conditions, which are redesigned from the perspective of Solidarity Economy. However, policy, not politics, seems to be enough to open paths to these new conditions. From this conclusion, the author reflects upon the possibility of meeting actions and reactions born amidst the contradictions of capitalist society emerges. For it, it would be necessary to activate the awareness of policy makers to prioritize problems of greater social relevance while also addressing “the need that transforms”. This should come from independent initiatives of social groups and movements, based on the ideals of Solidarity Economy.

This book certainly encountered criticism and the main one is the utopian characteristic of his ideas. Another criticism come from thinkers who see the solidarity economy as being possible to be contaminated by petty-bourgeois ideologies, who ignores the urgency of debating the participation of the technoscientific infrastructure and the scientific community in the social and political context. The answers to these criticisms are already in the book. The author indicates that “solidarity technoscience” does not depend on a radical interpretation of Marxism and he argues that the praxis aims to improve the real conditions of life. 

This book innovates the concept of solidarity technoscience in order to replace the concept of social technology, due to the ideological appropriation of the latter by the propertied classes, which led to a distortion of its original objectives. The number of definitions given to the idea of social technology over time do not explain the need for such technologies to be conceived with full popular and democratic participation. According to the author, this was the concept’s original intention. Nowadays, even academic works neglect this, causing a serious semantic deformation and of results.

The author proposes a socio-technical adaptation, as he considers it as a strategic path capable of opening paths for cognitive policies. This implies redesigning the capitalist technoscience, transforming it into the solidarity technoscience. This new expression becomes more appropriate and broader in scope for what the author proposes. The author chooses to use the term technoscience as he argues in favor of science and technology being examined as social processes that should look at the phenomenon’s totality, not as fragmented realities. According to the author, this idea of fragmenting both concepts is inadequate for the discussions carried out within the field of study of Science and Technology Studies (STS).

This book proposes a possible solution to the serious social, economic, and environmental situation in Latin America, which worsened from 2020 onwards with the Covid-19 pandemic. This solution would be through the expansion and consolidation of solidary production chains with the support of the solidarity technoscience, triggered by the initiative of teaching and research institutes. 

This book was written in an accessible and provocative language and it is aimed at all those who believe that an alternative economic development is possible. It is about bringing to the fore a debate with relevant themes that benefits the world population and the balance of planet Earth. For those who think it is possible for their food to reach their family's table without pesticides and that they can really nourish our bodies with a lower level of aggression to Earth's biomes, indigenous peoples, and traditional communities. This book should be of more interesting to those who drink from the same ideological source as left-wing parties. Nonetheless, the proposal it presents is aimed at tackling universal problems, which interests a good number of policy makers, students, and researchers in the field of science and technology policy. However, I personally recommend this book to a wider audience. It is clear that preferential readers, in order to effectively fulfill the book's goal, are those who will be in charge for the society’s transformation, so left-wing parties should see it as a guideline and strategies manual, with a goal to positively interfering both in policy and politics, especially in Latin American and Caribbean countries.

REFERENCES

DAGNINO, Renato. Tecnociência Solidária: um manual estratégico. Lutas Anticapital, Marília, 2019.