The Dilemmas of the Scientific Left
A review of Knowledge as Commons: Toward Inclusive Science and Technology by Prabir Purkayasha
By Renato Flores
Volume 27, no. 2, Political Economy of Science
In an age where Big Tech appears to come up with new ingenious methods for oppressing people, distrust of all forms of technology is a natural reaction. However, are we condemned to wear chains which we forged ourselves? Or can we build inclusive technology which will help us and even liberate us? Drawing from a long experience both on left militancy, and in taking part in the people’s science and free software movements in India, Prabir Purkayasha attempts to answer these questions in his recent book Knowledge as Commons: Toward Inclusive Science and Technology.
The book is a relatively short collection of essays written at different times revolving around the author’s thoughts on several topics: the generation of knowledge, the design of technology, how capitalism and imperialism affect how knowledge and technology are produced, and how India has approached science and technology historically. This means that while reading, one could get the impression of repetitiveness. Setting this aside, the main themes of the book are clear: (i) in the present day, scientific knowledge is increasingly privatized; (ii) its application through technology is made to serve the interests of Capital; (iii) it was not always like this, which means that science and technology can be returned to the people. The book also includes a discussion on the philosophy of technology and snippets from the history of Indian science, which enrich the content of the book, but overall falls short in a few key areas.
On the positive side, the essay collection is quite enlightening on the specific ways in which scientific knowledge is used for the benefit of the few. Purkayasha focuses on the Bayh-Dole Act, which allowed companies or individuals to patent inventions resulting from federally funded research. This act serves to “enclose” the scientific commons: the public pays for research in topics such as medicine, that research produces patented drugs that are sold back to the public at high prices. The book also gives examples of Western companies exploiting the Global South through intellectual properties, and delocalizing labor-intensive parts of the supply chain while keeping the most profitable parts home in the West (chapters 1–2). For example, Purkayasha describes how India manufactures many vaccines whose patents are owned by pharmaceuticals based in the Global North, which reap the lion’s share of the profits while Indians are left unable to buy the vaccines they produce (chapter 3). Finally, the discussion of the influence of the Indian and global left on the development of an independent scientific establishment after partition is a unique contribution; the comparison to Pakistan’s path of institutional dependence serves to draw a clear contrast between a science developed for local needs against one built by accepting the worldwide division of labor (chapter 9).
However, when it comes to envisioning what inclusive science and technology will look like, Purkayasha seems to lack the imagination for what a “people’s science” would look like, and ends up advocating for a self-reliance in the mold envisioned by India’s first president Jawaharlal Nehru. In this model, Indian companies are protected by the state so that they can develop and eventually play a global role analogous to those played by Japanese and South Korean companies in the present.
From the introduction, it is clear that Purkayasha is not a mere observer of technology but rather an active participant—he states he spent a significant amount of his time in the energy sector (p. 123). However, his knowledge of the intricacies of how science works is less sharp, and sometimes contradictory within the book. For example, in the introduction he states that science “is objective, dispassionate and natural” (p. 15), and throughout, the discussion of technology seems to take scientific neutrality at face value, especially when compared to technology, which he mentions “is also the result of social choices” (p. 100). However, at other points he does take a more critical stance, acknowledging that “science and scientific knowledge are historically produced” (p. 151), and that the racist bias of scientists can produce skewed results “even in mundane matters like measurement of cranial size” (p. 156).
This is an unresolved tension in the book: in earlier chapters Purkayasha seems to minimize the role that social values have in the production of science and even in technology. He states that “social choices do play a role but only once the major shaping of technology has already taken place, and they relate to the appearance of the artefact more than to the fundamental function for which it has been designed” (p. 101)—a statement which clearly cannot apply to the use of computers to build the modern surveillance state. Another example of where this tension appears is when he discusses the Green Revolution, distinguishing between an early “good” stage, which “came out of public domain science” and for which “there was no price to be paid by the farmer to utilise its advances,” and a present stage where “the gene revolution is controlled by a few private corporations such as Monsanto” (p. 47). This distinction is not supported by the historical record; the aim of the Green Revolution, that Purkayasha elided, was always to ensure the political stability of Global South countries so Western companies could continue to exploit them.
I must admit to having some sympathies towards Purkayasha: precisely delineating what is “real” and where the social values of a society come in is an extremely hard task. I agree with Purkayasha’s prescription that leftist scientists must fight these battles within the field of science, and that these battles look very different within each field. However, Purkayasha’s belief in the existence of a golden scientific past from the post-WW2 period is directly linked to his belief that it is possible and desirable to recover this period. In a way, Purkayasha seems to miss that public funding of research is still around, and that the allocation of public scientific funding is also decided by bodies of scientists through public proposal calls, peer review, and program officers coming from the scientific community. No substantial improvements nor ideas on how to make this more democratic are found in the book and this is surely its weakest point.
Despite the weaknesses, certain sections of the book can be quite interesting reads. Not often does one get a person with Purkayasha’s political and engineering experience to reflect on their lives. The second block of essays (chapter 4–6) theorizing the relationship between science and technology is very worthwhile, despite the issues with the philosophy of science mentioned above. The discussion of the role of production, economies of scale, and economic complexity should be taken seriously by people wishing to change the world. Maybe a discussion of aesthetic criteria is missing here; the usefulness of technology can be very subjective. The Free Software Movement never produced the slick design and ease-of-use that Steve Jobs would provide. These sections are worth engaging with, as is the story of the Indian left in the development of the scientific community (chapter 8), and a discussion on how Hindutva is being laundered to operate as an eternal truth (sometimes with the collaboration of the Western left; chapter 10).
But overall, I am left somewhat frustrated. By the end of the book Purkayasha directs his scorn at how the policies of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), India’s right-wing neoliberal current ruling party, are built on infrastructure generated by the legacy of Nehruvian self-reliance, while simultaneously destroying it and handicapping Indian companies at a global stage. Yet, little attention is given to envisioning what a science that actually serves people’s needs will look like. Though he mentions being a participant, little to no specifics are given on how the People’s Science Movement in India works, nor on how the free software movement operates in the present. Given the attention that Kerala’s popular science has received in the West, more discussion would surely be welcome.
To conclude, Purkayasha’s dilemma is not his alone. Many official communist parties in parts of the Global South are trapped between participating in popular fronts to pursue nationalist self-reliance in alliance with the nationalist bourgeoisie in the hope things improve somewhat for everyone, or prioritizing the needs of the oppressed and leading a weaker coalition to oppose both imperialism and the national capitalists. Purkayasha’s seeming choice of the former is a respectable political opinion. However, it also means that for many people the book will not be a place to look for fresh ideas.
Knowledge as Commons: Toward Inclusive Science and Technology
Prabir Purkayastha
Monthly Review Press
2024
258 pages
Renato Flores is a researcher in physics with a primary interest in complex and non-linear systems.
