Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Techno-progressivism

Techno-progressivism is an ideological stance rooted in thought that advocates for advancing human flourishing through the convergence of , democratic , and . Proponents emphasize that technologies such as , , and can empower individuals and mitigate inequalities when regulated transparently to prioritize public welfare over corporate or conservative restrictions. This perspective contrasts with both technophobic caution that stifles innovation and unregulated techno-libertarianism that ignores . Emerging prominently in the late 20th century amid debates over and digital networks, techno-progressivism gained traction through organizations like the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), founded to promote ethical uses of emerging technologies for and global challenges. Key figures such as James Hughes have articulated its core tenets, including —the right to modify one's body and mind—and support for open-source development to democratize access to advancements. The movement seeks to harness science for progressive ends, such as extending lifespans to reduce generational inequities and deploying AI for environmental monitoring, while critiquing bio-conservative efforts to limit human augmentation on moral grounds. Despite its optimism, techno-progressivism faces controversies over potential exacerbation of social divides if enhancements favor the affluent, prompting calls for universal access policies akin to public or healthcare. It has influenced discussions in and policy, advocating against bans on research into or cognitive enhancement, positioning technology as a tool for rather than mere efficiency.

Definition and Core Principles

Ideological Foundations

Techno-progressivism's ideological foundations rest on an extension of , which prioritizes empirical reasoning, scientific inquiry, and the potential for human flourishing through rational progress. Advocates posit that technological innovations inherently carry the capacity for and , but only when subordinated to democratic , , and to prevent exacerbation of inequalities. This stance rejects both technophobic resistance to innovation and unregulated , insisting instead on technodevelopmental social struggle to align advancements with broader ethical and social goals. Central to its framework is the integration of egalitarian commitments with techno-optimism, viewing not as neutral tools but as arenas for contesting power dynamics. James Hughes, a sociologist and of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies, frames techno-progressivism as a "techno-optimistic wing of the traditional liberal project," emphasizing collective oversight to ensure technologies serve public goods over private interests. This approach draws from historical strains that have championed state intervention in markets and for , manifesting over the past 250 years in responses to industrialization and scientific breakthroughs. Unlike libertarian variants that prioritize individual autonomy and market-driven innovation, techno-progressivism underscores the need for proactive policies addressing , such as universal access to enhancements and safeguards against or . Proponents argue that without such interventions, innovations risk entrenching hierarchies, as evidenced by critiques of proprietary models that favor corporate monopolies over open, equitable distribution. This foundation informs a to "democratic and transparently regulated" technoscientific change, positioning as a lever for reducing and expanding human capabilities under inclusive .

Key Tenets and Distinctions

Techno-progressivism posits that technological advancements can drive human emancipation and when subject to democratic oversight and equitable distribution. Core tenets include the belief that innovations in fields like and should be regulated transparently to mitigate risks while maximizing benefits, grounded in a proportionate that balances evidence-based caution with innovation. Advocates emphasize —the right to consensual modifications of one's body and mind through safe biomedical technologies—paired with policies ensuring universal access, such as public funding for longevity research to reduce societal costs from aging. This framework extends to support for to counter , with surveys indicating broad futurist endorsement, including 60% at a 2014 Singularity University event favoring UBI funded by progressive taxation or welfare redistribution. Key principles derive from Enlightenment ideals of reason, , and , asserting that progress encompasses not only scientific and technical gains but also ethical and social reforms for fairness. Techno-progressives argue for evidence-based policies that promote civil rights for enhanced individuals, including protections for and opposition to restrictions on genetic or cybernetic interventions deemed consensual and accountable. Unlike vague optimism, these tenets prioritize systemic interventions, such as to democratize enhancements, preventing a scenario where benefits accrue disproportionately to the wealthy—as evidenced by 2013 Pew Research finding 60% of Americans believing radical life-extension therapies would initially favor the rich. Distinctions from related ideologies highlight techno-progressivism's progressive orientation. It diverges from libertarian by rejecting minimal-state in favor of robust public and redistribution to ensure alongside individual , critiquing anarcho-capitalist approaches as likely to exacerbate inequalities. In contrast to , which seeks unchecked intensification of technological change regardless of social costs, techno-progressivism insists on steered development aligned with democratic values and precautionary . It opposes bioconservatism's inherent suspicion of human augmentation as disruptive to natural orders, instead viewing regulated enhancements as tools for overcoming biological limitations like and mortality in service of broader . This positions techno-progressivism as a mediated path beyond both technophilia's uncritical enthusiasm and technophobia's outright rejection, focusing causal mechanisms of tech-driven change on empirically verifiable social outcomes rather than ideological purity.

Historical Development

Pre-20th Century Roots

The intellectual foundations of techno-progressivism trace back to early modern advocates of empirical science as a means to enhance human welfare and societal organization, predating the formal coalescence of progressive ideologies in the 19th and 20th centuries. Francis Bacon (1561–1626), in works such as Novum Organum (1620), promoted the inductive scientific method to achieve mastery over nature, arguing that organized knowledge accumulation would yield practical inventions alleviating human toil and extending lifespans, thereby laying groundwork for viewing technology as an instrument of collective advancement. Bacon's vision in New Atlantis (1627) depicted a technocratic society governed by scientific institutions prioritizing utilitarian progress, influencing later conceptions of science-driven social improvement. During the Enlightenment, thinkers extended these ideas by linking scientific inquiry to broader social and moral evolution. The Marquis de Condorcet (1743–1794), in his Sketch for a Historical Picture of the Progress of the Human Mind (1795), posited an indefinite trajectory of human advancement through reason and science, forecasting improvements in education, health, and governance that would eradicate inequalities and foster democratic institutions via technological and mathematical innovations. Condorcet's framework emphasized empirical data from historical epochs to predict future epochs of perfected social conditions, integrating scientific progress with egalitarian reforms. In the early 19th century, (1760–1825) advanced proto-technocratic proposals, envisioning a meritocratic order led by industrialists, scientists, and engineers to rationally direct production and distribution, supplanting feudal and revolutionary chaos with scientific planning for societal harmony. His L'Industrie (1817) and later writings urged harnessing industrial for and economic efficiency, influencing European and early socialist by prioritizing expertise over inherited privilege. These pre-20th-century currents, rooted in causal mechanisms of knowledge application to material conditions, prefigured techno-progressivism's emphasis on as a lever for equitable , though they lacked the explicit ideological fusion with modern democratic progressivism.

Emergence in the Late 20th Century

The convergence of progressive social ideals with enthusiasm for technological advancement began to form distinct techno-progressive contours in the late , against the backdrop of rapid innovations in , , and communications. The marked a shift as personal computers proliferated—U.S. household ownership rose from under 10% in 1984 to over 20% by 1990—and early protocols enabled global connectivity, fostering optimism about technology's democratizing potential. These developments intersected with debates over , including the first successful IVF birth in 1978 and the Project's launch in 1990, which highlighted ethical tensions between innovation and equity. Progressive intellectuals increasingly argued that technoscientific progress could dismantle hierarchies of , , and , provided it was steered by inclusive governance rather than alone. A foundational text emerged in 1985 with Donna Haraway's ": Science, Technology, and Socialist-Feminism in the Late Twentieth Century," which rejected essentialist identities and championed hybrids as tools for socialist-feminist liberation, urging "progressive people" to harness "dangerous possibilities" in machine-organism fusions to challenge capitalist and patriarchal structures. Haraway's framework emphasized technology's role in boundary-transgression, influencing later techno-progressive views on and anti-essentialism, though she critiqued unchecked corporate control over biotech. Concurrently, transhumanist precursors laid groundwork: issued the Transhumanist Arts Statement in 1982, advocating aesthetic and cultural embrace of , while FM-2030's 1973 UpWingers manifesto promoted upward evolution via science, gaining renewed traction in futurist circles at institutions like UCLA. These ideas, though not yet explicitly "techno-progressive," highlighted technology's emancipatory promise amid neoliberal , which progressives saw as exacerbating inequalities. By the , factional debates within emerging transhumanist communities crystallized distinctions: Max More's 1990 transhumanist philosophy and 1992 founding of the Extropy Institute emphasized individual liberty and market-driven progress, prompting progressive counterpoints favoring collective oversight to ensure equitable benefits from enhancements like and . Early mentions of "techno-progressive" stances appeared in extropian discussions by the late , critiquing libertarian excesses and aligning with left-leaning calls for public funding of research—evident in support for unrestricted work amid 1998 Dolly the sheep . This period's techno-optimism, fueled by the dot-com surge and biotech boom, set the stage for formalized techno-progressivism, distinguishing it from by prioritizing empirical advancement over tradition.

Evolution in the 21st Century

![Transhumanism symbol][float-right] The early marked a period of institutionalization for techno-progressivism, exemplified by the founding of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET) in 2004 by bioethicist James Hughes and philosopher . This nonprofit promotes the view that advancements in , such as and , can enhance human freedom, happiness, and flourishing when integrated into democratic societies with equitable policies. The IEET's activities include research, publications, and advocacy focused on ethical frameworks that prioritize alongside technological innovation. Concurrently, Hughes published Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future in 2004, articulating a core techno-progressive argument that technologies necessitate proactive democratic governance to distribute benefits widely and avert exacerbating social inequalities. The book critiques both conservative resistance to and libertarian , advocating instead for public investment in and regulatory oversight to align enhancements with progressive values like and anti-discrimination. This work positioned techno-progressivism as a response to the ethical challenges posed by rapid advancements in and during the decade. In the and , techno-progressivism evolved amid accelerating and biotech developments, with advocates like those at IEET engaging in debates over to ensure technologies serve interests rather than entrenching corporate power. For example, the movement has emphasized policies combating tech monopolies, bolstering social welfare systems, and defending against automation-driven disruptions. By the mid-, discussions incorporated calls for techno-progressive models that reconcile with social progress, including equitable access to tools and human augmentation. This adaptation reflects a sustained effort to counterbalance libertarian techno-optimism, as seen in manifestos like Marc Andreessen's 2023 Techno-Optimist Manifesto, by insisting on collective oversight and redistribution mechanisms.

Key Figures and Organizations

Prominent Thinkers

James J. Hughes, a sociologist and bioethicist, is a foundational figure in techno-progressivism, having popularized the term through his advocacy for integrating progressive politics with technological advancement to enhance human capabilities democratically. As executive director of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), which he co-founded in 2004, Hughes argues that emerging technologies like and should be regulated to promote equity and prevent , emphasizing universal access over market-driven disparities. In works such as his 2004 book Citizen Cyborg, Hughes posits that radical and cognitive enhancement can align with if paired with policies like and democratic oversight. Dale Carrico, a political theorist and critic of unregulated , has advanced techno-progressivism by framing it as a counter to both bioconservative fears and libertarian transhumanist excesses, insisting on peer-reviewed, democratically accountable innovation. Carrico describes techno-progressives as those who view technoscientific change as potentially emancipatory when subordinated to progressive values like inclusivity and , critiquing "robot cultists" who prioritize individual enhancement without social safeguards. His writings, including essays on technoprogressive , highlight the need for public deliberation to mitigate risks from technologies like , drawing on to advocate for collective empowerment over hierarchical control. Other thinkers, such as philosopher , have influenced techno-progressive thought through critiques of human exceptionalism and endorsements of hybridity via technologies, as in her 1985 , which envisions science fiction-inspired alliances between machines and marginalized groups to challenge binaries of nature and culture. While not self-identifying strictly as techno-progressive, Haraway's emphasis on situated knowledges and technoscientific resonates with the movement's push for inclusive futures beyond traditional .

Influential Organizations and Networks

The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), founded in 2004 by philosopher and bioethicist James J. Hughes, functions as a nonprofit dedicated to examining the ethical implications of with a technoprogressive orientation. IEET promotes policies ensuring that advancements in , , and other fields enhance human freedoms, equality, and democratic control, while critiquing unregulated corporate dominance in tech development. Humanity+, originally established in 1998 as the World Transhumanist Association by and David Pearce and rebranded in 2008, operates as an international nonprofit advocating for the ethical application of technology to expand human capabilities. Its democratic transhumanist strand aligns closely with techno-progressivism by emphasizing equitable access to enhancements and regulatory frameworks to prevent exacerbating social inequalities. The organization builds networks through annual conferences, scholarly publications, and collaborations with like-minded groups to influence global policy on human augmentation. In , the French Transhumanist Association (AFT-Technoprog), de facto initiated in 2007 and officially founded in 2010 by Marc Roux, explicitly positions itself within techno-progressivism by advocating technology-driven solutions to social challenges under democratic and egalitarian principles. It critiques libertarian and prioritizes public oversight of innovations like longevity research and to align with progressive values. These entities interconnect through overlapping , joint , and shared advocacy, forming a niche but influential network that shapes debates on integrating technological progress with , though their impact remains limited compared to broader progressive or tech policy institutions.

Technological Focus Areas

Biotechnology and Human Augmentation

Techno-progressives advocate for the ethical advancement of to overcome biological limitations and promote human flourishing, emphasizing regulated access to enhancements as an extension of bodily autonomy and . James Hughes, a prominent techno-progressive thinker, argues in his 2010 essay that such align with values, supporting the use of , , , and (NBIC) for voluntary human modification while ensuring safety through democratic oversight. This stance contrasts with bio-conservative restrictions, positioning enhancements like genetic therapies as tools for reducing suffering from hereditary diseases and extending healthy lifespans. In , techno-progressives endorse technologies such as CRISPR-Cas9 for therapeutic applications, viewing precise as a means to eradicate conditions like sickle cell anemia, with potential extension to enhancement if risks are mitigated via rigorous testing and equitable distribution. Hughes' framework in Citizen Cyborg (2004) calls for public funding of research into editing to prevent inequality exacerbation, advocating policies that democratize access rather than market-driven exclusivity. They prioritize empirical evidence of safety, as demonstrated by clinical trials showing CRISPR's efficacy in treating in 2020, while critiquing unregulated private pursuits that could widen social divides. Human augmentation through , including therapies and , is seen by techno-progressives as empowering individuals against age-related decline and physical constraints, with Hughes proposing universal coverage for enhancements akin to prosthetics. For instance, advances, such as induced pluripotent stem cells pioneered by in 2006, enable tissue repair and organ replacement, aligning with goals of radical life extension without coercive . Proponents stress causal mechanisms—biotech intervenes directly in physiological processes to enhance resilience—while insisting on institutional safeguards against misuse, informed by historical data on vaccine development where public regulation balanced with . Critically, techno-progressive support hinges on evidence-based outcomes, rejecting unsubstantiated fears of "playing " and instead citing longitudinal studies on interventions like , which improved for millions since the , to justify scaled-up augmentation. This approach favors iterative progress, with oversight bodies evaluating enhancements' net benefits, such as cognitive boosts from nootropics or neural interfaces, to ensure they serve collective welfare over elite privilege.

Artificial Intelligence and Automation

Techno-progressives regard (AI) and as pivotal technologies for advancing human flourishing by reducing mundane labor and augmenting cognitive capacities, provided they are governed democratically to prioritize public welfare over corporate profit. This perspective, articulated by figures like James Hughes of the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), posits that AI can enhance democratic processes, such as through automated tools for information verification and citizen organization, thereby countering and fostering collective action. However, they caution against unchecked deployment, citing empirical evidence of automation's role in job displacement; for instance, studies indicate that up to 47% of U.S. jobs face high automation risk, necessitating policies like (UBI) to redistribute productivity gains. In policy terms, techno-progressives advocate for state-led investment in ethical development, emphasizing open-source models and international regulations to prevent monopolistic control by entities like , which could entrench power imbalances. Hughes has specifically called for biopolitical frameworks integrating with progressive values, including safeguards against in algorithms that perpetuate inequalities observed in real-world applications, such as facial recognition errors disproportionately affecting minorities at rates up to 35% higher. They distinguish this from libertarian by insisting on collective oversight, arguing that market-driven historically amplifies disparities, as seen in the post-2008 rise of gig economies where contributed to wage stagnation for low-skill workers. Critically, techno-progressive analyses incorporate causal realism by linking AI's transformative potential to institutional design; without proactive interventions like retraining programs—proven effective in reducing automation-induced by 20-30% in targeted sectors—societal disruptions could fuel backlash against technological progress. Organizations like IEET promote for human augmentation while critiquing accelerationist haste, favoring measured advancement aligned with empirical assessments of risks, such as existential threats from misaligned estimated at 10-20% probability by expert surveys. This balanced approach seeks to harness automation's efficiency gains, which have historically boosted global GDP by 0.5-1% annually through productivity improvements, for equitable outcomes rather than .

Other Domains like Space and Environment

Techno-progressives regard as a domain for advancing human flourishing through technological abundance, emphasizing public-sector investments to enable missions beyond , such as crewed Mars expeditions and enhanced robotic probes. They propose allocating additional resources, including an annual $5 billion increase to NASA's budget—with $3 billion for and $2 billion for robotic missions—to drive innovations that yield terrestrial benefits like advanced computing and . This approach contrasts with privatization-heavy models by prioritizing democratic to ensure equitable to space-derived opportunities, such as resource from asteroids to alleviate Earth's scarcity pressures. In environmental domains, techno-progressives integrate ecomodernist principles with state-directed innovation to decouple from ecological degradation, advocating technologies that concentrate human activity to preserve areas. They endorse , including thorium reactors, alongside fusion research, for resilient agriculture, and lab-grown meat to reduce land use for farming. Policies like the are supported for funding these advancements through green industrial strategies, including carbon capture systems and reversible geoengineering techniques such as solar radiation management, coordinated internationally to mitigate climate risks without curtailing development. This stance critiques both market-driven underinvestment in high-risk technologies and anti-technological , favoring of tech-driven emission reductions over paradigms.

Policy Advocacy and Positions

Governance and Regulation Proposals

Techno-progressives advocate for regulatory frameworks that embed democratic oversight into the development and deployment of emerging technologies, ensuring innovations enhance human capabilities while addressing risks such as , misuse, and existential threats. This approach contrasts with by emphasizing public accountability and equitable access, positing that technologies like and require proactive to align with societal values rather than corporate priorities. James Hughes, in his 2004 book Citizen Cyborg, argues that democratic societies must adapt institutions to manage technologies, proposing policies that promote resilience through regulated access rather than prohibition or unchecked markets. In biotechnology, proposals focus on regulations that facilitate therapeutic and enhancement applications while mandating fairness in distribution to prevent . Hughes and affiliated organizations like the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET) call for public funding of research into extension and augmentation, such as therapies to slow aging, to democratize benefits beyond private markets. This includes advocacy for policy coalitions to secure government investment, exemplified by the Campaign for the Longevity Dividend, which seeks to treat aging as a amenable to regulated biomedical as of 2022. Regulations should prioritize equality in access to enhancements, opposing bio-conservative bans while imposing safeguards against non-therapeutic coercion or . For and , techno-progressives propose oversight mechanisms that integrate ethical alignment with economic redistribution, such as to counter job displacement. Democratic , as articulated by Hughes, extends to structures, including international bodies for standards that prevent monopolistic control and ensure in algorithmic . The IEET emphasizes equitable to harness for social progress, advocating against unregulated deployment that exacerbates disparities, with calls for public-private partnerships under democratic mandates as outlined in their 2024-2025 strategic plans. Broader proposals include moral enhancement technologies under regulated frameworks to foster societal cooperation, with safeguards against authoritarian misuse, as proposed by transhumanist groups in 2022. These governance models prioritize evidence-based risk assessment over precautionary bans, drawing on egalitarian principles to build adaptive institutions capable of iterating policies as technologies evolve.

Social Equity and Democratic Control

Techno-progressives advocate for the equitable distribution of technological advancements to address social inequalities, arguing that unrestricted market access to enhancements like anti-aging therapies and cognitive augmentations could exacerbate class divides. In the of November 2014, drafted at , signatories called for access to such technologies through public subsidies and regulation to ensure benefits accrue broadly rather than solely to the affluent. Proponents, including sociologist James Hughes, contend that policies such as , , and lifelong are essential to mitigate job displacement from while enabling participation in a high-tech . Democratic control forms a core tenet, with techno-progressives promoting "democratic " to involve public deliberation in technological , preventing monopolistic capture by corporations or elites. Hughes emphasizes radical democratic mechanisms, including expanded governmental with oversight, to democratize decision-making on and equitably share risks and rewards. This approach seeks transnational cooperation to manage existential risks, such as AI misalignment, while prioritizing citizen empowerment over technocratic or alternatives. In practice, these principles manifest in advocacy for antitrust measures against tech giants and public funding for assistive technologies to uphold disability rights and reproductive freedoms, viewing democratic as a safeguard for egalitarian outcomes in a future. Critics within the movement note challenges in implementation, given historical precedents where state interventions have unevenly distributed benefits, though proponents maintain that evidence from social welfare programs supports feasibility.

Economic Implications

Techno-progressives posit that advancements in and will generate substantial , prompting the need for (UBI) as a mechanism to sustain economic participation and social stability amid reduced labor demand. They anticipate UBI implementation as inevitable, initially modest but expanding, funded through gains in technological productivity, and supplemented by retraining programs and public investments such as those outlined in [Green New Deal](/page/Green_New Deal) frameworks. To finance such redistributive measures, techno-progressives endorse progressive taxation structures that shift fiscal burdens from lower-income groups toward higher earners and corporations, aiming to mitigate exacerbated by concentrated tech-driven wealth. This aligns with their broader economic stance favoring social welfare expansions, including models like for All, to distribute benefits from biotechnological and productivity enhancements equitably. Corporate regulation features prominently in their advocacy, with calls for antitrust actions to dismantle tech monopolies and enhanced oversight of deployment to safeguard and prevent unchecked market dominance. These measures reflect a correlated preference for union support and state-guided economic interventions, viewing unregulated as inadequate for channeling technological abundance toward rather than . In envisioning a post-work enabled by abundance-creating technologies, techno-progressives emphasize democratic controls to ensure equitable access, though empirical outcomes of past —such as net job creation in sectors like —suggest debates over the scale of future displacement. Their framework integrates these policies with investments in research and infrastructure to foster sustained innovation while addressing environmental and distributional challenges.

Criticisms and Counterarguments

Bio-Conservative Objections

Bio-conservatives object to techno-progressivism's embrace of technologies, such as genetic editing and cognitive augmentation, on grounds that these interventions erode the fixed essence of essential to moral and political order. They argue that human dignity—often termed "" as the inherent equality derived from unenhanced biological vulnerabilities—forms the basis for universal rights and democratic equality, which techno-progressive pursuits risk fracturing by enabling hierarchical divisions between enhanced elites and unaltered masses. articulated this in 2004, labeling , a foundational techno-progressive , as "the world's most dangerous idea" because it challenges the species-wide equality underpinning , potentially leading to a post-human era where enhanced individuals dominate politically and socially. Leon Kass, former chair of the U.S. President's Council on , extends these critiques by invoking the "" against germline modifications and reproductive biotechnologies, positing that intuitive moral aversion signals violations of the "giftedness of life"—the unchosen natural endowments that foster virtues like , effort, and communal . In his analysis, Kass warned that enhancements "beyond " transform human aspiration into commodified optimization, diminishing the profound experiences tied to natural limits, such as mortality and bodily frailty, which he views as integral to authentic human flourishing. Further bio-conservative arguments highlight irreversible risks and societal backfiring, where enhancements intended to alleviate inequalities instead amplify them through unequal access or , such as reduced or psychological from one's unaltered origins. For instance, critics contend that even democratized enhancements, as techno-progressives propose, could normalize eugenic pressures, echoing historical abuses like early 20th-century forced sterilizations in the U.S., which affected over individuals by 1970s estimates, by prioritizing engineered traits over natural variation. These objections prioritize conserving humanity's "messy, random quality," as opposed to techno-progressive rationalization, emphasizing empirical uncertainties in long-term outcomes like heritable edits' ecological impacts or social cohesion erosion.

Libertarian and Market-Oriented Critiques

Libertarian critics argue that techno-progressivism's advocacy for state-mediated and democratic oversight of technological distorts signals and impedes by prioritizing collective over individual initiative. They contend that free markets, through voluntary exchange and incentives, allocate resources more efficiently toward breakthroughs in areas like and , as evidenced by the rapid evolution of unregulated sectors such as software, where has driven costs down and up without mandated interventions. In contrast, techno-progressive proposals for public funding or regulations on human augmentation are viewed as coercive transfers that slow diffusion, with empirical studies showing regulations equivalent to a 2.5% reducing overall by approximately 5.4%. Market-oriented thinkers, including those aligned with libertarian , further critique techno-progressivism for conflating technological optimism with redistributive policies that undermine property rights and entrepreneurial risk-taking. For instance, calls for subsidized access to enhancements or open-source mandates to ensure "" are seen as violating the , potentially deterring investment by eroding protections that have historically spurred advancements, such as the biotechnology boom following relaxed frameworks in the . Proponents like Steve Fuller highlight how egalitarian constraints on "superior individuals" risk entrenching mediocrity, arguing that historical data from less-regulated environments demonstrates faster progress than in heavily intervened systems. These critiques extend to economic implications, where techno-progressive positions on —such as proposals for tech taxes to fund —are faulted for ignoring how market-driven historically creates net job growth and higher living standards, as observed in the U.S. sector's adaptation post-1980s adoption. Libertarians maintain that such interventions foster dependency and , citing examples like Europe's slower development relative to the U.S. due to precautionary regulations, which prioritize hypothetical risks over empirical benefits of decentralized experimentation.

Accelerationist and Techno-Optimist Divergences

Techno-progressives diverge from in their insistence on guided technological advancement rather than unchecked intensification of processes like and automation to provoke radical upheaval. , as theorized by philosophers such as and later adapted into (e/acc) by figures like Guillaume Verdon, advocates accelerating and computational growth to trigger an intelligence explosion that resolves societal issues autonomously, often rejecting regulatory pauses as counterproductive obstacles. In e/acc, technological progress is seen as thermodynamically inevitable, with human agency limited to removing barriers like safety protocols, potentially leading to outcomes where supplants current power structures without deliberate equity measures. Techno-progressives, however, critique this approach for risking existential hazards and exacerbating inequalities, favoring instead institutional frameworks—such as democratic oversight and redistributive policies—to harness technology for while preserving agency and . Left-accelerationism, a variant seeking to repurpose accelerated toward post-capitalist ends through political planning, shares some techno-progressive affinity for technology's emancipatory potential but diverges by underemphasizing immediate regulatory interventions in favor of riding systemic contradictions to collapse. The 2013 #Accelerate Manifesto, for instance, argues that only through intensifying and can alternatives emerge, dismissing reliance on welfare-state reforms as stagnationist. Techno-progressives like James Hughes counter that such neglects proactive , where state and actively shape outcomes, as seen in advocacy for universal access to enhancements and therapies under democratic control rather than market or machinic . This divergence underscores techno-progressivism's commitment to causal realism: technological trajectories are malleable through policy, not inexorable forces demanding surrender. Techno-optimism presents another point of contention, exemplified by Marc Andreessen's October 2023 Techno-Optimist Manifesto, which endorses via entrepreneurial markets to combat stagnation and deliver abundance, portraying critics of rapid deployment—such as environmentalists or equity advocates—as enemies of progress. While sharing about technology's problem-solving capacity, techno-progressives reject this libertarian framing for sidelining collective governance, arguing that market-driven acceleration concentrates power among venture capitalists and tech firms, as evidenced by development's reliance on private funding exceeding $100 billion annually by 2024 without proportional public benefit mandates. Hughes and allied thinkers emphasize embedding progressive values—like tied to gains and participatory regulation—to prevent techno-optimism's vision from devolving into , where gains accrue unevenly amid rising automation-induced displacement projected to affect 300 million jobs globally by 2030 per estimates. Empirical cases, such as uneven access to despite its 2012 breakthrough, illustrate how unregulated fails to deliver equitable augmentation, reinforcing techno-progressive calls for models blending with safeguards.

Impact and Empirical Assessment

Notable Achievements and Case Studies

The adoption of the Decidim platform in serves as a in techno-progressive , enabling and policy consultations via open-source digital tools since its launch in 2016. By 2020, the platform had facilitated over 1,500 participatory processes involving more than 200,000 verified users, allowing citizens to propose, debate, and vote on municipal decisions in real time, thereby enhancing democratic inclusion through technology. The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET), a key techno-progressive organization founded in 2004, has advanced intellectual contributions through targeted research initiatives, including the completion of post-doctoral fellowships on topics such as the future of work and in 2024. These efforts produced peer-reviewed outputs, including six open-access articles and books like "Biopolitics of " published that year, influencing ethical frameworks for . Advocacy by techno-progressive thinkers, such as James Hughes, has supported policies harmonizing with , exemplified by endorsements of initiatives reducing through accessible enhancements, though large-scale empirical outcomes remain limited to theoretical and pilot stages.

Unintended Consequences and Failures

Efforts to deploy advanced rail technology for equitable and low-emission mobility, such as California's project initiated in 2008, have exemplified planning and execution shortfalls. Originally estimated at $33 billion to connect major cities and reduce automobile dependence, the project ballooned to over $100 billion in projected costs by 2025, with only preliminary construction in the Central Valley completed and no operational high-speed segments despite $11 billion spent federally and state funds. Delays stemmed from environmental litigation, land acquisition disputes, and mismanagement, resulting in the forfeiture risk of $4 billion in federal grants in 2025 due to noncompliance with timelines. These outcomes underscore how ambitious techno-progressive visions for can encounter systemic barriers, including regulatory hurdles and fiscal overruns, without delivering promised societal benefits. Germany's , launched in 2010 to transition to sources for environmental sustainability and , illustrates resource misallocation and counterproductive energy dynamics. The involved over €500 billion in subsidies and investments by , yet renewable expansion lagged targets, with electricity prices for households roughly doubling since inception and grid instability prompting reliance on coal-fired plants—emissions rose temporarily after the 2011 nuclear phase-out. Unintended effects included undercutting natural gas markets, exacerbating dependence on imports until the 2022 crisis, and net economic losses estimated at $67.6 billion in energy exports from 2008 to 2013 due to high domestic costs. Despite intentions to model democratic technological for global goals, the initiative has not achieved emission reductions proportional to inputs, highlighting risks of policy-induced market distortions in complex energy systems. Regulatory frameworks promoting technological equity, such as the European Union's (GDPR) enacted in 2018, have yielded adverse impacts on digital innovation. Compliance burdens disproportionately affected smaller firms, with showing a 10-15% drop in EU web traffic and online tracking post-implementation, as users opted out and startups faced high costs averaging millions in setup. This contributed to , benefiting large incumbents able to absorb expenses while penalizing competitors, and impeded data-driven advancements like training, where static rules clashed with evolving tech needs. Although aimed at empowering individuals against corporate overreach, GDPR's rigid approach fostered a on experimentation, with studies indicating reduced and slower adoption compared to less-regulated regions. Such cases reveal how well-intentioned safeguards can inadvertently entrench barriers to the very progress they seek to democratize.

Broader Societal Reception

Techno-progressivism, as a integrating with social goals, has elicited varied responses across societal segments, with adoption largely limited to niche intellectual, academic, and communities rather than widespread public embrace. Surveys on technology's broader impacts reveal persistent public wariness, undermining the optimistic premises central to techno-progressive advocacy. A 2023 analysis indicated that 52% of U.S. adults expressed greater concern than excitement about artificial intelligence's integration into daily life, citing risks such as job loss and ethical dilemmas. Similarly, a 2020 Pew survey found 47% of respondents viewing technology as having generated more societal problems than solutions, reflecting anxieties over amplification and intrusions that techno-progressives propose to address via democratic oversight but which often heighten skepticism toward unchecked acceleration. This ambivalence manifests in partisan divides, where conservative-leaning publics frequently decry techno-progressive emphases on state-guided tech deployment as fostering technocratic overreach and eroding individual liberties. A 2025 Gallup poll underscored this by showing Americans evenly split on whether represents a transformative threat or mere evolutionary step, with conservative respondents more inclined to the former due to perceived cultural disruptions. Among progressives, reception is bifurcated: while some embrace technology's potential for equity—evidenced by growing advocacy for "techno-optimistic " amid 's 2020s surge—others, influenced by historical anti-industrial backlashes, criticize it for insufficiently challenging entrenched power dynamics and prioritizing gadgets over change. Culturally, techno-progressivism struggles against narratives amplified in , which—often reflecting institutional biases toward risk-highlighting—portray tech optimism as naive or elite-driven, as seen in coverage framing innovations as exacerbating divides rather than resolving them. Empirical indicators of reception include tepid uptake; for example, U.S. proposals tying to have polled mixed support, with a 2025 Quinnipiac survey showing conflicting views on AI's job market effects, 48% anticipating net harm despite techno-progressive arguments for adaptive redistribution. Internationally, European attitudes lean more regulatory, aligning partially with techno-progressive calls for oversight but rejecting unfettered optimism, as evidenced by the EU's 2024 AI Act prioritizing risk mitigation over innovation acceleration. Overall, societal reception remains guarded, with techno-progressivism's influence confined to forward-looking think tanks and emerging debates rather than .

References

  1. [1]
    What is Technoprogressivism? - Science, Technology & the Future
    Technoprogressivism is an ideological stance with roots in Enlightenment thought which focuses on how human flourishing is advanced by the convergence of ...
  2. [2]
    Shaping the Technoprogressive Tendency into a Political Agenda
    Jul 19, 2022 · Technoprogressivism is a strain of Enlightenment political thought that has manifested in various ways over the last 250 years. It is found when ...
  3. [3]
    Techno-progressivism - DKS
    Stance. Techno-progressivism maintains that accounts of "progress" should focus on scientific and technical dimensions, as well as ethical and social ones.
  4. [4]
    Technoprogressivism: Beyond Technophilia and Technophobia
    At its heart technoprogressivism is simply the insistence that whenever we talk about "progress" we must always keep equally in mind and in hand both its ...<|separator|>
  5. [5]
    Technoprogressivism - by James J Hughes - IEET's Substack
    On this week's Prosthetic Gods Nir and J. talk about J's advocacy of “technoprogressivism.” What is it, and what is it supposed to accomplish?
  6. [6]
    Transcript: Dr. James Hughes on What is Technoprogressivism?
    Jan 22, 2015 · Hughes contextualizes the movement as a new, techno-optimistic wing of the traditional Enlightenment liberal project, and portrays ...
  7. [7]
    Francis Bacon - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Dec 29, 2003 · Francis Bacon (1561–1626) was one of the leading figures in natural philosophy and in the field of scientific methodologyBiography · Scientific Method: Novum... · The Ethical Dimension in... · Bibliography
  8. [8]
    Francis Bacon (1561—1626) - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
    Though it is hard to pinpoint the birth of an idea, for all intents and purposes the modern idea of technological “progress” (in the sense of a steady, ...
  9. [9]
    https://digitalcommons.calpoly.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1713&context=bts
  10. [10]
    Outlines of an historical view of the progress of the human mind
    Condorcet wrote this while in prison awaiting execution by the Jacobins. It is an optimistic view of the progress the human race will undergo when political and ...Missing: science | Show results with:science
  11. [11]
    Condorcet: The Future Progress of the Human Mind
    We shall indicate particularly the most likely and most imminent progress in those sciences that are now commonly believed to be almost exhausted. We shall ...Missing: technology | Show results with:technology
  12. [12]
    Condorcet and the Theory of Progress | by Outis | LICENTIA POETICA
    Oct 21, 2024 · Condorcet also saw scientific progress as a key driver of social reform. He believed that advances in medicine, agriculture, and technology ...
  13. [13]
    Prophets of international technocracy - Oxford Academic
    Most treatments, however, see the technocratic tradition as beginning with Henri de Saint-Simon (1760‒1825) and his disciple Auguste Comte (1798‒1857).
  14. [14]
    The Birth of Technocracy: Science, Society, and Saint-Simonians
    It was Saint-Simon's argument that the future of the industrialist lay with those who worked for him, not with those for whom he worked. of the individual and ...Missing: roots | Show results with:roots
  15. [15]
    Saint-Simon's Technocratic Internationalism, 1802–1825
    Jun 27, 2021 · He was also an early proponent of technocratic internationalism—a set of ideas about the economic and political integration of the world through ...Missing: roots | Show results with:roots
  16. [16]
    Techno-progressivism | Research Starters - EBSCO
    Techno-progressives believe that technology can empower individuals and facilitate systemic reforms to address historical injustices related to race, gender, ...
  17. [17]
    [PDF] Donna Haraway, "A Cyborg Manifesto: Science, Technology, and ...
    So my cyborg myth is about transgressed boundaries, potent fusions, and dangerous possibilities which progressive people might explore as one part of needed ...
  18. [18]
    https://www.nickbostrom.com/papers/history.pdf
  19. [19]
    http://www.maxmore.com/transhum.htm
  20. [20]
    Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies - Idealist
    IEET's Background and History​​ The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies is a nonprofit think tank founded in 2004 by philosopher Nick Bostrom and ...
  21. [21]
    [PDF] 2024 Progress Report & 2025 Plans
    The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies was founded in 2004 by philosopher Nick Bostrom and bioethicist James J. Hughes, and is incorporated as a.
  22. [22]
    Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies - UNESCO
    A nonprofit think tank which promotes ideas about how technological progress can increase freedom, happiness, and human flourishing in democratic societies.
  23. [23]
    Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond To The ...
    A provocative work by medical ethicist James Hughes, Citizen Cyborg argues that technologies pushing the boundaries of humanness can radically improve our ...
  24. [24]
    Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human ...
    A provocative work by medical ethicist James Hughes, Citizen Cyborg argues that technologies pushing the boundaries of humanness can radically improve our ...Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  25. [25]
    The Technoprogressive Agenda After Fascism - IEET's Substack
    Mar 9, 2025 · Ten years since the Technoprogressive Declaration we need the technoprogressive vision of radically democratic high-tech future more than ever.
  26. [26]
    Techno-Progressive Governance: How Governments should rethink ...
    Feb 4, 2025 · Techno-progressivism is an intellectual and social movement that advocates the use of technology and innovation to enhance human capabilities ...Missing: definition | Show results with:definition
  27. [27]
    Where has the left's technological audacity gone? | Leigh Phillips
    Mar 11, 2025 · In 2023, Andreessen issued his Techno-Optimist Manifesto, expanding beyond the e/acc's focus on AI to encompass all questions of technological ...<|separator|>
  28. [28]
    [PDF] TechnoProgressive Biopolitics and Human Enhancement - PhilPapers
    In both Carrico's and my own usages however, technoprogressivism is the consistent application of progressive values to technology and enhancement issues.
  29. [29]
    Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies - SourceWatch
    "The Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies is a nonprofit think tank which promotes ideas about how technological progress can increase freedom, ...
  30. [30]
    Home - IEET
    - **Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies (IEET):** Nonprofit think tank focused on promoting technological progress to enhance freedom, happiness, and human flourishing in democratic societies.
  31. [31]
    Humanity+ - H+Pedia
    Jun 20, 2025 · Humanity+ (Humanity plus) was founded 1998 and legally incorporated as 2002 as the World Transhumanist Association (WTA) by Nick Bostrom and ...
  32. [32]
    Humanity Plus | Transhumanism Wiki - Fandom
    Humanity Plus (formerly the World Transhumanist Association) is an international non-governmental organization which advocates the ethical use of emerging ...<|separator|>
  33. [33]
    Humanity+
    Humanity+ advocates for the ethical use of technology and evidence-based science to expand human capabilities. We want people to be better than well.Mission · Philosophy · Membership · LeadershipMissing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  34. [34]
    AFT Technoprog - H+Pedia
    Mar 16, 2021 · AFT Technoprog · De facto foundation: 2007 · Official foundation: 2010 · Founder: Marc Roux.
  35. [35]
    Marc Roux - #IAmTranshuman
    Nov 18, 2019 · So, in 2009, we co-founded AFT-Technoprog, the first French transhumanist organization that is characterized by its techno-progressive ...
  36. [36]
    French Transhumanist Association - Technoprog
    The French Transhumanist Association – Technoprog stimulates public discourse on questions relating to the current changes in the biological and social ...Missing: humanity+ | Show results with:humanity+
  37. [37]
    Welcome to the Technoprogressive - IEET's Substack
    May 24, 2025 · A newsletter we're launching to kick off our new Technoprogressive Hub project in partnership with the Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies.
  38. [38]
    Technoprogressive biopolitics and human enhancement. - PhilPapers
    James Hughes. In Jonathan D. Moreno & Sam Berger (eds.), Progress in Bioethics: Science, Policy, and Politics. MIT Press (2010). Authors. James Hughes.Missing: techno- ideas
  39. [39]
    Technoprogressive Biopolitics and Human Enhancement
    ... Advocating for the free use of NBIC technologies, techno-progressivism permits people to control their reproductive rights, bodies and brains at will within ...
  40. [40]
    Technoprogressive Biopolitics and Human Enhancement
    In both Carrico's usage and my own, however, technoprogressivism is the consistent application of progressive values to technology and enhance- ment issues.Missing: techno- progressivism
  41. [41]
    Human enhancement: Genetic engineering and evolution - PMC - NIH
    Sep 28, 2019 · This Commentary explores genetic enhancement in an evolutionary context. We highlight the multiple effects associated with germline heritable genetic ...Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  42. [42]
    Technoprogressive biopolitics and human enhancement. - PhilArchive
    Technoprogressive biopolitics and human enhancement · James Hughes. In Jonathan D. Moreno & Sam Berger, Progress in Bioethics: Science, Policy, and Politics ...Missing: techno- ideas
  43. [43]
    James Hughes - Closer To Truth
    Rejecting bioconservatism and libertarian transhumanism, Hughes argues for democratic transhumanism, a radical form of techno-progressivism that asserts that ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  44. [44]
    Can AI Improve Democracy? - by IEET and James J Hughes
    Jul 10, 2024 · This essay focuses on how automation can improve citizens' access to trustworthy information, connect us with other citizens to organize for ...
  45. [45]
    Progressive Techno-Optimism? - by Joshua Citarella
    Mar 26, 2025 · Abundance is a policy compass for Democratic party politicians in the next decade. It serves as a left-liberal counter to the techno-optimism of the right.Missing: principles | Show results with:principles
  46. [46]
    AI: the role of the state and a progressive narrative
    Mar 12, 2025 · How can AI be used for good? Read about how the state can leverage AI for good and how a progressive narrative around AI can be crafted.
  47. [47]
    Progressive Visions of Space Exploration : Democracy Journal
    Dec 21, 2018 · The sort of ambitious progressive space exploration policy sketched above will require more resources for NASA.
  48. [48]
    EcoSocialism and the Technoprogressive Perspective - Medium
    Mar 15, 2021 · Today the term “technoprogressive” is only used by a few thinkers, such as David Wood in his 2018 Transcending Politics: A Technoprogressive ...Missing: coined | Show results with:coined
  49. [49]
    (PDF) A Review of: “James Hughes. 2004. Citizen Cyborg
    A review of James Hughes. 2004. Citizen Cyborg: Why Democratic Societies Must Respond to the Redesigned Human of the Future.
  50. [50]
    Nine technoprogressive proposals | dw2
    Feb 22, 2022 · Their proposals could address, for example, AI, enhancing human nature, equity and justice, accelerating science, existential risks, the ...
  51. [51]
    https://longevityalliance.org/
  52. [52]
    [PDF] Techno-progressives versus bio-conservatives - Raco.cat
    Apr 3, 2018 · Some of the most prominent critics include humanist thinkers like Marcel Gauchet, Luc. Ferry, André Comte-Sponville, Hans Jonas and Jürgen.
  53. [53]
    On Democratic Transhumanism
    Jun 24, 2009 · The World Transhumanist Association has become Humanity+, and is growing quickly, as are related organizations working on anti-aging ...
  54. [54]
    Technoprogressive Declaration - H+Pedia
    Aug 24, 2020 · The Technoprogressive Declaration was published on the IEET website in November 2014. It was drafted in a side-meeting of TransVision 2014 ...Content of the Declaration · Authors of the Declaration
  55. [55]
    Techno-Progressives and the Post 2015 Millennium Development ...
    Sep 8, 2013 · Techno-progressive need to reach out to and collaborate with others engaged in the various and until now largely separate utopian projects that ...
  56. [56]
    Technopolitics is Not Beyond Left and Right After All - Medium
    Dec 5, 2020 · A technoprogressive framework that links technooptimism to egalitarianism can be part of this new 21st century social democratic renaissance. We ...Missing: equity | Show results with:equity
  57. [57]
    A Philosophical History of Transhumanism | Issue 160
    Democratic transhumanism encourages governments to embrace transhumanistic projects, and proposes that technological and other scientific self-enhancements ...
  58. [58]
    Beyond Therapy: Biotechnology and the Pursuit of Human ...
    Compared with other contemporary issues in bioethics, the questions connected with biotechnological enhancement seem abstract, remote, and too philosophical, ...
  59. [59]
    Enhancing Conservatism - The Ethics of Human Enhancement - NCBI
    Dec 19, 2016 · For Kass, enhancement would dehumanise the enhanced by undermining human dignity. He sees human dignity as that property that not only underlies ...Enhancement policy and... · Does established wisdom... · Factor X enhancement...
  60. [60]
    Bioconservatism, bioenhancement and backfiring - PMC
    Bioconservatives sometimes supplement the backfiring objection by arguing that change will be irreversible, that the new (or the unconventional) is especially ...
  61. [61]
    Beyond safety: mapping the ethical debate on heritable genome ...
    Apr 20, 2022 · Critics of heritable genetic interventions argue that germline manipulation would disrupt this natural heritage and therefore would threaten ...
  62. [62]
    Overregulation Threatens the Digital Economy - AEI
    Jun 21, 2024 · An American free market paradigm has resulted in an American-led tech industry. Among the largest tech firms globally, eight out of ten are ...
  63. [63]
    Does regulation hurt innovation? This study says yes - MIT Sloan
    Jun 7, 2023 · They concluded that the impact of regulation is equivalent to a tax on profit of about 2.5% that reduces aggregate innovation by around 5.4%.).<|control11|><|separator|>
  64. [64]
    The Impact Of Tech Regulation On Innovation, Society And ... - Forbes
    Oct 22, 2024 · Critics often argue that government-imposed restrictions stifle innovation, harm competitive advantage and slow the pace of technological ...
  65. [65]
    Towards a Transhumanist Techno-progressive Divorce
    Aug 19, 2013 · Someone like Steve Jobs was dependent on a society and history around and before him to obtain his visions, and we can never be quite sure if ...
  66. [66]
    Transhumanism and Libertarianism Are Entirely Compatible
    Aug 31, 2017 · Zoltan defines transhumanism as "the international movement of using science and technology to radically change the human being and human ...
  67. [67]
    At All Costs: Effective Accelerationism, Techno-Optimism ... - Mindplex
    Nov 2, 2024 · Can humanity thrive under the rapid march of Effective Accelerationism, or is it a utopian myth serving Silicon Valley's elite?
  68. [68]
    What is Accelerationism? A Primer on the Defining Philosophy of ...
    May 13, 2025 · Accelerationism is the idea that the best way to bring about radical change in society is to speed up the very processes that shape society.Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  69. [69]
    The paradox of AI accelerationism and the promise of public interest AI
    Oct 2, 2025 · Public interest AI inverts AI accelerationism, promoting more equitable, sustainable, and democratically accountable technological progress.Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  70. [70]
    #ACCELERATE MANIFESTO for an Accelerationist Politics
    May 14, 2013 · Whereas the techno-utopians argue for acceleration on the basis that it will automatically overcome social conflict, our position is that ...
  71. [71]
    The Techno-Optimist Manifesto - Andreessen Horowitz
    Oct 16, 2023 · We believe in accelerationism – the conscious and deliberate propulsion of technological development – to ensure the fulfillment of the Law of ...
  72. [72]
    Trump 2.0 Runs on Tech Accelerationism | TechPolicy.Press
    Jun 26, 2025 · Today's techno-accelerationists aim to undo generations of slow, arduous progress toward social, political, and economic equality. They want ...Missing: progressivism | Show results with:progressivism
  73. [73]
    [PDF] EcoSocialism and the Technoprogressive Perspective - PhilArchive
    Jan 8, 2022 · EcoSocialism and the Technoprogressive Perspective | by James J. Hughes PhD | Institute for Ethics and Emerging Technologies |… https ...<|separator|>
  74. [74]
    High-Speed Fail | Cato Institute
    May 14, 2025 · Although the size and scale of California's failure are eye-opening, most of the project's problems and root causes are typical of large ...
  75. [75]
    Billions spent, miles to go: The story of California's bullet train | Grist
    Sep 8, 2025 · Billions spent, miles to go: The story of California's failure to build high-speed rail · California's dream of building a high-speed rail system ...
  76. [76]
    On The Verge Of Losing $4 Billion In Federal Funds, High Speed ...
    Jun 13, 2025 · The FRA's 300-page report cited systemic failures in management, funding, and schedule compliance in its decision. California high-speed rail ( ...
  77. [77]
    https://www.cagw.org/california-high-speed-rail-still-multi-billion-dollar-boondoggle
  78. [78]
    Inside the Energiewende: Policy and Complexity in the German ...
    Mar 11, 2011 · To date, the Energiewende offers strong lessons about the unintended consequences of such interventions, but whether Germany can meet its goals ...
  79. [79]
    Energy transition not on track: readjustments urgently needed
    Mar 7, 2024 · The German energy transition is not on track, with issues including lagging behind targets for renewable energy, high electricity costs, and ...Missing: unintended consequences
  80. [80]
    What has gone wrong with Germany's energy policy - The Economist
    Dec 15, 2014 · But an unintended side-effect of the policy has been that renewables undercut relatively climate-friendly natural gas on price. This means that ...Missing: consequences | Show results with:consequences
  81. [81]
    Lessons from Germany's Wind Power Disaster - Stop These Things
    Aug 3, 2014 · A recent analysis found that from 2008 to 2013, Germany incurred $67.6 billion (€52 billion) in net export losses because of its high energy ...
  82. [82]
    [PDF] The German Gamble: An Analysis of the Energiewende Policy and ...
    Accordingly, Energiewende is likely to not only fail to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and energy consumption, but also fail to provide an energy policy model ...<|separator|>
  83. [83]
    Is GDPR undermining innovation in Europe? - Silicon Continent
    Sep 11, 2024 · ... unintended effects of GDPR for EU firms : Web traffic and online tracking fell by 10-15% after GDPR began. Users often opt out when asked ...
  84. [84]
    What the Evidence Shows About the Impact of the GDPR After One ...
    Jun 17, 2019 · One year later, there is mounting evidence that the law has not produced its intended outcomes; moreover, the unintended consequences are severe ...
  85. [85]
    The impact of the EU General data protection regulation on product ...
    Oct 30, 2023 · ... innovation consequences of data protection regulation ... Privacy & Market Concentration: Intended & Unintended Consequences of the GDPR.
  86. [86]
    The Consequences of Regulation: How GDPR Is Preventing AI
    Jun 22, 2023 · ... unintended consequences for beneficial innovation. A static regulatory approach impedes the evolution of technology, which, if permitted to ...<|separator|>
  87. [87]
    What the data says about Americans' views of artificial intelligence
    Nov 21, 2023 · 52% of Americans are more concerned than excited about AI in daily life, compared with just 10% who say they are more excited than concerned.
  88. [88]
    5. Tech causes more problems than it solves - Pew Research Center
    Jun 30, 2020 · Technology provides us with powerful tools that can help us advance socially and civically, but these tools need to be thoughtfully and ...
  89. [89]
    What's Wrong with Technocracy? - Boston Review
    Aug 22, 2022 · Democratic theory points to two problems: unjust concentrations of power and a flawed theory of knowledge.
  90. [90]
    AI: Major Threat or Just the Next Tech Thing? - Gallup News
    Jul 10, 2025 · U.S. adults are evenly divided over whether artificial intelligence is a normal technological evolution that will help humans or a novel ...
  91. [91]
    Thoughts on techno-optimistic socialism - Niskanen Center
    Sep 28, 2023 · The new school of techno-optimistic socialists focuses on achieving freedom from the market, when the radical change that is really needed ...
  92. [92]
    The left needs its own version of techno-optimism - The Guardian
    Mar 11, 2025 · We live in dark, depressing and – frankly – terrifying times. Will technology push us over the edge or help us exit our many crises?
  93. [93]
    The Rise of Techno-authoritarianism - The Atlantic
    Jan 30, 2024 · A parallel movement was that of the Italian futurists, led by figures such as the poet F. T. Marinetti, who used maxims like “March, don't ...
  94. [94]
    The Age Of Artificial Intelligence: Americans Wary Of Impact On ...
    Apr 16, 2025 · Americans have mixed feelings about how AI is affecting society and have conflicting views on AI's impact on the job market.