"Technology should be an important ingredient. It may be and should be a tool for social development"
About this Quote
Technology belongs in the recipe of a just society, but it is not the meal. Calling it an ingredient stresses context and proportion: tools gain meaning only when mixed with institutions, ethics, and shared civic goals. Aleksander Kwasniewski, who guided Poland through democratic consolidation, NATO membership, and European Union accession, saw firsthand how modern infrastructure, digital networks, and administrative reform could accelerate a post-communist transition. His formulation carries both pragmatism and a moral nudge. Technology may be a tool for social development, but it should be one; whether it becomes so depends on political choices.
The word tool rejects technological determinism. A hammer can build or break; so can algorithms, broadband, and data. Aligning them with social development means targeting capabilities people actually need: schools that connect students to knowledge and critical thinking, clinics that extend telemedicine to rural districts, public services accessible through transparent, accountable e-government. It also means designing for inclusion, not just efficiency, and measuring progress by expanded human dignity rather than gadget counts or market valuations.
Kwasniewski’s European context matters. The social model he championed links growth to cohesion, rights, and opportunity. Technology that widens divides, amplifies disinformation, or entrenches surveillance undermines that model. The digital divide is not just about devices; it is about literacy, affordability, accessible design, and trust. Without those, new systems can entrench old inequalities and create new ones.
The imperative follows: invest in universal access and skills, demand public-interest standards from platforms and vendors, and build data governance that protects privacy while enabling innovation. Encourage civic uses of technology that strengthen participation and accountability. A society that treats technology as an ingredient asks always what the tool is for and who benefits. Success is not the newest platform, but whether more people can learn, heal, work, and participate with dignity. That is the promise Kwasniewski urges us to insist on.
The word tool rejects technological determinism. A hammer can build or break; so can algorithms, broadband, and data. Aligning them with social development means targeting capabilities people actually need: schools that connect students to knowledge and critical thinking, clinics that extend telemedicine to rural districts, public services accessible through transparent, accountable e-government. It also means designing for inclusion, not just efficiency, and measuring progress by expanded human dignity rather than gadget counts or market valuations.
Kwasniewski’s European context matters. The social model he championed links growth to cohesion, rights, and opportunity. Technology that widens divides, amplifies disinformation, or entrenches surveillance undermines that model. The digital divide is not just about devices; it is about literacy, affordability, accessible design, and trust. Without those, new systems can entrench old inequalities and create new ones.
The imperative follows: invest in universal access and skills, demand public-interest standards from platforms and vendors, and build data governance that protects privacy while enabling innovation. Encourage civic uses of technology that strengthen participation and accountability. A society that treats technology as an ingredient asks always what the tool is for and who benefits. Success is not the newest platform, but whether more people can learn, heal, work, and participate with dignity. That is the promise Kwasniewski urges us to insist on.
Quote Details
| Topic | Technology |
|---|
More Quotes by Aleksander
Add to List
