Originally written March 3, 2017
Note: This essay was originally written for an application to study History at Cambridge University through a year-long program. Though I was not accepted to the program, the essay itself remains a strong distillation of my ideas on the intersection of political though and technology. I have lightly abridged and edited it so that it focuses less on telling people why I should be selected to go study this intersection, and more on the content of the intersection itself (which is a nightmare to explain in casual conversation). Considering the recent effects of Russian-based targeted ads used in Facebook’s supposedly non-biased platform to influence voters, a reflection on such an intersection seems pertinent.
As an Electrical Engineering student, I study information theory, circuit design, and data science, learning about electron doping in semiconductor material, linear mappings used in signal processing, and digital logic. Much of my work focuses on the tiny, invisible-to-the-human-eye processes of particle movement and mathematics which have very large and very visible impacts on society. Yet as I focus on understanding and wielding these tiny processes, I am hardly encouraged to consider the wider societal impacts they create. The companies of Silicon Valley rally under the banner of disruption and progress while manufacturing solutions to such things as dog walking, selfies, and advertising. They appear primarily beholden to monetization, and it has become the norm for the technological elite to move forward in one of history’s most dramatic power shifts with little reflection on the social and political power of the systems they increasingly control— yet they need to.
The Economist recently wrote that “far from democratizing entertainment, the internet will entrench an oligarchy.” Such a statement seems antithetical to the democratic nature of the internet, yet it appears to be true. With exponentiated choice people rely heavily on ratings systems and established success, making the rich richer and the poor poorer. Well then—what kind of system is the internet? What kind of system should it be? Through my knowledge of technical systems like the internet, I seek to articulate unique considerations in relation to what the system ought to be. As a problem solver, I desire a holistic understanding of the modern world, drawing on seemingly disparate fields of knowledge to connect solutions in one section of society to problems in another. Understanding the role of technology in politics, culture, and society requires a deeper understanding of the tensions and ideologies that have shaped the world up to the present day. I see the study of history as fundamental in augmenting my technical knowledge to better understanding the complex forces at play between innovation, changing means of production, and social and political responses.
Reading through essays on the French Revolution or critiques of the nineteenth century British Government, I am always struck by the hard theoretical problems that arise from these real conflicts and remain relevant today. When Marx and Engels hail the class struggles between the bourgeois and the proletariat as the beginning of the final revolution to accomplish the communist agenda, I step back and observe how the economic tides of society and the technological advancements of machinery at the time had shaped their ideology. As Robespierre speaks to the National Convention regarding the king’s trial on the eve of the Great Terror in France, I feel the tension between rights, public safety, and justice. Factions of intellectuals each advocated their own imperfect solution to the crisis at hand, each wholly believing in their own means and ends, be it terror or not. But what aim did The Terror accomplish, and was it necessary? In reflecting on the French Revolution, I can observe parallels in the modern world, where the tension between public safety and individual rights remains an important debate. Through contextualizing political theories, one develops a more nuanced understanding of societies past and a more enlightened view of the state of the world today.
Since the nineteenth century, inventions in the field of Electrical Engineering have had a major societal impact, bringing the world closer together. The field attracted me because of how applications of electricity touched so much in my life and the world around me. During my undergraduate career at Rice I have been challenged to learn mathematical models and tools, and have developed a strong basis of technical knowledge; but I feel as though I am not equipped with the intellectual tools to reason with how I ought to use this technical knowledge. Such an education feels incomplete. By studying both subjects together (history and engineering), an understanding of the world and the issues facing it can be merged with knowledge of the possible technical solutions available.
My time at Cambridge would be about strengthening the communion between my technical and liberal arts skillset, allowing me to demonstrate the magnified power of the merging of the two fields of thought. Though the gap between technology and the humanities can seem wide, I am not alone in my passion to bridge it. Recently Apple published a statement declaring that, “[t]echnology alone is not enough. Technology must intersect with the liberal arts and the humanities, to create new ideas and experiences that push society forward,” reinforcing the notion that a cross pollination of ideas is necessary and important in the future. As an undergraduate at Rice studying Electrical Engineering, I am challenged to think critically and develop solutions to some of the most complex problems society has ever faced. At the same time, I must remain cognizant of the systems I seek to influence and the greater changes upon society that may result from the introduction of new technologies. Furthering my studies in the history of political thought is an important step in my journey to bridge the gap between digital innovation and normative discourse.