The Political Philosophy of Technological Independence (Conceptual Paper Series on African Technological Nationalism)

This paper conceptualizes the political philosophy of technological independence as a necessary paradigm for Africa and the wider “poor world.” It advances the argument that Western technological powerhouse countries cannot, in themselves, permanently obstruct technological takeoff in peripheral states; rather, the real impediment derives from the ignorance, miseducation, and misplaced developmental priorities of the citizens and leaders of these states. The study contends that technological independence must be understood as a political right, inseparable from sovereignty and democracy, and that any assertion of political independence or economic autonomy that lacks technological self-sufficiency is ultimately cosmetic, deceptive, and unsustainable. The theoretical framework integrates Science and Technology Studies (STS), especially the Social Construction of Technology (SCOT) paradigm, Political STS, and the author’s own Technological Independence Theory. This synthesis makes visible the ways in which technology is socially constructed, politically contested, and democratically claimed as a sovereign right. It also engages with the Dependency Theory of Development, not as a terminal diagnosis of Africa’s dependency, but as a framework to be transcended through deliberate domestication of technological capabilities. The analysis herein redefines democracy itself as incomplete without technological sovereignty and reframes political sovereignty as contingent upon the mobilization of a country’s intellectual and scientific resources. Methodologically, the paper adopts a qualitative, interpretive approach embedded in political philosophy analysis, critical discourse analysis, and comparative-historical inquiry. Philosophical analysis is deployed to reinterpret concepts such as sovereignty, independence, and democracy through the prism of technology. Critical discourse analysis interrogates dominant modernization and globalization narratives that normalize technological servitude, while comparative-historical analysis draws lessons from historical cases of technological takeoff, including Japan, China, and Russia, to situate Africa’s possibilities and challenges. The methodology further adopts a constructivist epistemology, privileging indigenous theorization and cultural resources as legitimate sites of knowledge production. In combining these theoretical and methodological resources, the paper constructs an ontology of technological independence as both a normative political philosophy and a practical policy imperative. It argues that the democratization of technological takeoff is the surest safeguard against authoritarian developmentalism and perpetual dependency. In this way then, the political philosophy of technological independence becomes a radical intervention in political theory, Science and Technology Studies, and the development discourse, while simultaneously offering a roadmap for Africa’s second independence – that of technological sovereignty.

Technological Independence, Technological Takeoff, Technological Sovereignty, Science and Technology Studies (STS)

1. Amin, S. (1976). Unequal development: An essay on the social formations of peripheral capitalism. Monthly Review Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. de Albuquerque João Porto, Cukierman Henrique Luiz, Marques Ivan da Costa & Feitosa Paulo Henrique Fidelis (2013). Challenging the Ontology of Technoscientific Artefacts: Actor‐Network Theory in Developing Countries. [Actor‐Network Theory for Development Working Paper Series]. Centre for Development Informatics, Institute for Development Policy and Management, SED. University of Manchester. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. J. (ed.s) (1987). The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology. MIT Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Brake, Mark and Griffiths, Martin (2004). Science, Fiction and Curriculum Innovation. R.P. Norris and F.H. Stootman (eds.) Bioastronomy 2002: Life Among the Stars. IAU Symposium, Vol 213, 2004. https://articles.adsabs.harvard.edu/cgi-bin/nph-iarticle_query?2004IAUS..213..572B&defaultprint=YES&filetype=.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Cardoso, F. H., & Faletto, E. (1979). Dependency and Development in Latin America. University of California Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Deane, Phyllis (1992), The first industrial revolution. (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Deci, Edward L.; Ryan, Richard M., (2000). The “What” and “Why” of Goal Pursuits: Human Needs and the Self-Determination of Behavior. Psychological Inquiry Vol. 11, No. 4, 227-268. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Emerson, R. W. (1871). Essays: First Series. Boston: James R. Osgood & Co. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Ezeani, Emefiena (2014). In Biafra Africa Died: The diplomatic plot (3rd ed.). Veritas Lumen Publishers. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Fakorede, A. (2015). Nigeria loses N34bn to phone imports monthly. National Daily Newspaper. https://nationaldailyng.com/nigeria-loses-n34bn-tophone-imports-monthly-2/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fakorede, A. (2015). Nigeria loses N34bn to phone imports monthly. National Daily Newspaper. Retrieved from https://nationaldailyng.com/nigeria-loses-n34bn-to-phone-imports-monthly-2/ [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Fairclough, N. (2013). Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language (2nd ed.). Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Frank, A. G. (1967). Capitalism and underdevelopment in Latin America: Historical studies of Chile and Brazil. Monthly Review Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Frank, A. G. (1969). Latin America: Underdevelopment or Revolution. Monthly Review Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Grantham-McGregor, S., Cheung, Y. B., Cueto, S., Glewwe, P., Richter, L., & Strupp, B. (2007). Developmental potential in the first 5 years for children in developing countries. The Lancet, 369(9555), 60–70. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hobbes, T. (1651). Leviathan. London: Andrew Crooke. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Jasanoff, S. (2004). States of Knowledge: The Co-Production of Science and the Social Order. Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Latour, B. (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Locke, J. (1689). Two Treatises of Government. London: Awnsham Churchill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Miller, S. (2001). Public understanding of science at the crossroads. Public Understanding of Science, 10(1), 115–120. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Nwosu, Technics I. (2018). Ethnic Science Fiction in Africa’s Political Sphere: the drivers of Technoscience. Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 6(6) 163 -168. (Full Length Research Paper) https://www.academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2018/Augus [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Nwosu, Technics I. 2019a. The Political Dimensions of Science Consciousness in Africa.Global Journal of Human Social Science. Volume 19. Issue 4. Version 1.0. (Full Length Research Paper)https://socialscienceresearch.org/index.php/GJHSS/article/view/3063/2952 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Nwosu, Technics I. (2019a). The Political Dimensions of Science Consciousness in Africa. Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 7(4) 109-131. (Full Length Research Paper)https://www.academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2019/June/Nwosu.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Nwosu, Technics I. (2019b). Theory of the Scientific State (1). Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 7(6) 200- 215. (Full Length Research Paper)https://academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2019/August/Nwosu.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Nwosu, Technics I. 2020a. Constructing Reward Systems for Science and Technology Practitioners in Black Africa. Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 8(2) 32-48 (Review Paper)https://ljp.softinator.com/constructing-reward-systems-for-science-and-technology-practitioners-in-black-africa/https://academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2020/February/Nwosu.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Nwosu, Technics I. (2020b). Theory of Ethnic Innovation Policy. Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 8(2) 55-65 (Review Paper)https://academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2020/February/Nwosu%202.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Nwosu, Technics I. (2020c). Ethnic Construction of Technology. Int. J. Polit. Sci. Develop. 8(3) 88-120 (Review Paper)https://www.academicresearchjournals.org/IJPSD/PDF/2020/March/Nwosu.pdf [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

28. Pinch, T. J., & Bijker, W. E. (1984). The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other. Social Studies of Science, 14(3), 399–441. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

29. Popper, Karl R. (1995). The Open Society and Its Enemies (Golden Jubilee one-volume edition) London: Routledge. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

30. Posner, D. N., & Verde, A. (2013). The institutional determinants of authoritarian persistence and democratization. Comparative Political Studies, 46(11), 1454–1482. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

31. Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

32. Rousseau, Jean-Jacques. The Social Contract; or, Principles of Political Right. Translated by G. D. H. Cole. London: J. M. Dent & Sons, 1913. Originally published as Du Contrat Social; ou Principes du droit politique in 1762. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

33. Sen, A. (1981). Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation. Oxford: Clarendon Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

34. Shelley, P. B. (1820). Prometheus Unbound: A Lyrical Drama in Four Acts. London: C. and J. Taylor. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

35. Skinner, Q. (2002). Visions of Politics, Volume 1: Regarding Method. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

36. Snow, C. P. (1961). The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

37. Walker, S. P., Wachs, T. D., Gardner, J. M., Lozoff, B., Wasserman, G. A., Pollitt, E., … & Carter, J. A. (2007). Child development: Risk factors for adverse outcomes in developing countries. The Lancet, 369(9556), 145–157. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Global Political Economy and Educational Reforms in the Global South: An Evolutionary Study of Ghana
• Electoral Militarization and the Challenges of Free and Fair Elections in Nigeria: A Focus on the 2023 Presidential Election
• Political Awareness and Engagement in Relation to Voting Behavior among College Students
• Role of Community Leaders in Ensuring Secure Electoral Process in Nairobi City County, Kenya
• Assessing the Delivery of Local Disaster Management Services and Client Satisfaction through SERVQUAL Dimensions