ABSTRACT
By taking different political perspectives on China’s ‘digital leap forward’, the chapters in this book assume that there is no such thing as a socially neutral technology. However, while it is evidently true that the social impact of a machine like the Internet depends on the ways in which it is appropriated by particular societies, it is also important to avoid the extreme position of assuming that artifacts can be molded to fit political purposes without any limitations imposed by their technical specifications. The case of Robert Moses the New York builder might demonstrate that a bridge can be used to divide people just as well as it can be made to connect them, 1 yet it is also possible to find examples of technologies that seem to be ‘inherently political’ in that they demand the formation of certain kinds of political systems if they are going to be used effectively. The classic example is nuclear power, the safe use of which demands a significant sacrifice of civil liberties, through measures such as increasing the use of background security checks and covert surveillance in order to prevent certain materials falling into the hands of terrorists and other criminals. 2
