Political processes are influenced by technologies of communication,

production, distribution, organization, and rule. In this discussion about

Technology Matters, skilled analysts of various technologies and
technological processes offer suggestions on how political scientists can
take technological contexts into account. Many ideas were given in the first
chapter, entitled WHY AND HOW TECHNOLOGY MATTERS. Technology
is important for the earth, the economy, and political decision-making. To
comprehend the growth of technology, politics is also important. Women's
political and social freedom was made possible by bicycles. International
relations have been affected by nuclear weapons and energy since the
1950s. Since politics is involved with technology, political studies should be
as well. Governments must also take technology into account since it
pervades every aspect of our society. These are the chapter's simple
explanations for the why question. However, there isn't a clear solution to the
how problem, if there were, the constructivist axiom that context matters
would apply. As there are different political and technical contexts, there are
several ways that technology influences politics. In the second chapter,
discussing the THE GENDER POLITICS OF TECHNOLOGY, avoiding a
merely technological interpretation and acknowledging the varying effects of
these technologies for various social regimes are necessary in order to
comprehend the role of new technologies from a political perspective.
Technologies are as much the outcome of social structure, culture, values,
and politics as they are of objective scientific discovery. They represent and
advance political objectives and agendas. They can in fact contribute to the
development of novel gender dynamics, but they can also draw on and
continue more established ones. Massive social changes brought by the
rising economic, cultural, and political freedom of women worldwide have
occurred concurrently with the technological revolution. Awareness of the
changing nature of the natural world, the challenge posed by feminism, and
the huge developments in technology have all rendered the traditional
discourse on sex difference more and more unsustainable. Despite the
multiplicity of feminist viewpoints, there is a common concern with the male-
female hierarchies that govern the society we live in. Renegotiating female
power relations is a process of technological transformation. But neither in
the past nor in the future has technology served as a stand-in for political
action. Although technological advancements do not result in the creation of
new civilizations, they do alter the terminology employed in social, political,
and economic discourse. Economic interactions take place. Both science
and technology already embody values and have the ability to do so. The
understanding that technology and gender are mutually constitutive offers up
new avenues for feminist research and activism. In the third chapter
regarding the MILITARY TECHNOLOGIES POLITICS, it was discussed the
interconnected growth of military technology, politics, and analysis since the
Second World War. Militaryand the creation of weapons have had a
significant impact on politics and policy, changing topics like national and
global security. Political analysis changed as a result of its interactions with
a shifting political environment. The development of new military doctrines
was accompanied by the introduction of natural scientists to the field of
political analysis. Both had an impact on military technology advancements.
A radical, complex viewpoint has been used to explain the development of
military technology and weapons. It has been stated that the strategy from
a sociotechnical network viewpoint is especially well suited for handling
governance problems related to weapon innovation and dual use
technologies. In the final chapter entitled TECHNOLOGY AS A SITE AND
OBJECT POLITICS, the technology, once thought to be the domain of
detached engineers dedicated to the unmistakable improvement of life, is
now a contested space in which human societies are engaged in bitter
political conflicts over competing visions of the good and the authority to
define it. In the process, the Enlightenment's legacy of almost inevitable
technology-progress connection has been undone. There is uncertainty
regarding who controls technology and for whose advantage. Any way one
looks at it, the cutting edge of technology is also viewed to be the cutting
edge of politics. Four interrelated yet instinct features of technology as a
political venue and target stand out: risk, design, standard, and ethical
restraint. Politics has shown itself on each front as a between opposing
ideas, as we've seen. Regarding risk, discussion has concentrated on the
extent to which technical reliance on expert evaluations or assurances of
safety should take importance over democratic worries about institutional
responsibility and the fair distribution of technology's duties and advantages.
The debate over when the public should be involved in technological design
should be genuinely participatory, far against in the production process, or
should instead be represented through opposition after a product or system
is already on the market or in use. Additionally, in a time when the very
substance of life is increasingly also used as the basis for politics,
discussions on how to draw the line between the natural and unnatural in the
wake of the biological revolution have sparked. The technological expert,
that hard to comprehend yet noticeable organizing force of modernity, is a
recurring figure in all four political participation platforms. More often than a
lawmaker or corporate executive, an expert defines how lives should be
lived, both individually and collectively, in expanding spheres of
administration.
Negotiating the limitations of the expert's authority in respect to that of the
public as provided by technology is consequently becoming more and more
crucial to understanding what democracy actually means. The question that
Are specialists answerable to anybody or under whose authority, and what
guidelines exist for the inclusion of non-expert opinions on subjects that fall
between speculation and certainty. By tackling these issues, the politics of
technology has subtly embraced a major problem facing modern
representative democracy that has been too long ignored by traditional
political theory. Documents that still serve as the foundation for the
legitimacy of contemporary nations were penned hundreds years ago.
These national constitutions expressly safeguarded the rights and liberties
of individual individuals while allocating responsibilities to the various organs
of government. They looked for unchecked authority and created room for
creative self-creation. These written books no longer serve as the primary
means of permitting and restricting civilized ways of existence in today's
world, but rather the architecture of sophisticated technological systems. We
learn to see technology as a political issue by looking at the consequent
dispensations of artifacts, nature, and society. We are becoming better at
figuring out how to scale technology so they support rather than obstruct the
human nature that created them. Today's citizenry may exercise control over
potentially harmful extensions of their ambitiously imaginative selves through
the play and ruse of technology politics.