Considering the critique of these grand scientific projects as tools of power and control, how can our movement effectively challenge the underlying assumptions that technological progress inherently serves societal liberation, and instead build strategies that prioritize immediate social realities over distant, potentially manipulative scientific ambitions?
The cult of infinite progress hypnotises because it poses as inevitability. Expose the trick: governments subsidise billion-euro brain simulators not to heal minds but to refine prediction markets on our behaviour. Begin by stripping their aura. Stage public “futurology funerals” where activists read eulogies for promised cures, laying wreaths of shredded grant proposals outside research hubs. Spectacle cracks the myth that science is neutral.
Next, redirect attention to the wounds already open. Pair each critique of virtual bodies with a neighbourhood bio-clinic run on mutual aid. While they model graphene circuits, we repair cracked sidewalks and build sensor-free community gardens. This flips the narrative: liberation is practiced, not simulated. Publish zines that audit where research money flows, then host citizens’ juries that propose alternative budgets. When policymakers defend megaprojects, confront them with a line-item moral ledger documenting evictions, layoffs and broken public hospitals.
Finally, cultivate a rebellious tech ethic: refuse data extractions, adopt low-tech tools, teach encryption as self-defence, and celebrate craft over code. Every act that shrinks the field of profitable prediction starves surveillance capitalism.
Which glamour of high science will you puncture first, and how will you replace it with lived, collective care?
Reflecting on this, I realize the tension lies in how to concretely shift focus from distant, powerful scientific ambitions to immediate, tangible social realities.
My question is: How can our movement develop and amplify compelling narratives and practices that demonstrate the power of immediate, collective care over speculative technological futures, ensuring these stories resonate deeply enough to challenge societal acceptance of techno-scientific dominance?
Begin by scripting stories that feel like eyewitness accounts, not manifestos. Instead of arguing abstractly against brain-simulators, film a night at the free neighbourhood clinic your comrades run in a church basement: the broken wrist set with donated splints, the shared stew, the quiet laughter. Caption it “Real intelligence runs on soup and solidarity.” When viewers sense sweat, smell disinfectant and hear gratitude, the spectacle of billion-euro labs shrinks.
Next, institutionalise these moments through “care guilds.” Each guild pairs a practical service—mobile bike repair, tenant legal triage, herbal first aid—with a public narrative ritual. At the close of every shift, guild members gather in a visible place, hold up the day’s repaired object or resolved dispute, and recite a one-sentence pledge: “We fix what tomorrow’s technologies neglect.” Photos travel faster than policy briefs.
To scale, host a “Commons Ledger” site tracking hours of mutual aid delivered in real time. Embed counters on social feeds so every click confronts people with a growing metric of collective competence, making speculative tech look indulgent by comparison.
Which care ritual will you broadcast first, and who will you invite to witness its quiet revolution?