Lewis Mumford’s Warning for the Future of Civilization: Authoritarian vs. Democratic Technics
In 1963, Lewis Mumford delivered a speech titled Authoritarian and Democratic Technics, later published in Technology and Culture, where he outlined a provocative and far-reaching thesis: that technological development has followed two distinct and competing paths throughout history—one authoritarian, the other democratic.
Mumford defines technics as the entire system of tools, machines, and their social, cultural, and ethical impacts—not just technology itself. It encompasses how technology is developed, controlled, and integrated into society, shaping human life and civilization.
This essay is a crucial lens through which to understand the trajectory of technological power in modern society. Mumford’s insights are not merely historical reflections but urgent warnings about the consolidation of centralized control, the mechanization of human life, and the dangers of an unchecked technological system. If we fail to heed his warnings, we risk being completely absorbed by an authoritarian technics that subjugates humanity to the logic of machines and institutions rather than empowering individuals and communities.
The Two Technics: Authoritarian and Democratic
Mumford’s core argument is that since the late Neolithic period, two fundamentally different approaches to technology have coexisted:
Democratic Technics – Small-scale, decentralized, and human-centred. This form of technology is adaptable, resilient, and allows individuals or communities to retain autonomy. It is evident in traditional agriculture, craftsmanship, and cooperative labor, where human skill and judgment play a crucial role.
Authoritarian Technics – Large-scale, centralized, and system-centred. This form of technology depends on rigid hierarchies, mass organization, and external control. It first emerged with the construction of ancient empires, where kings and rulers wielded massive workforces to create monumental projects such as pyramids, canals, and military machines.
Mumford warns that authoritarian technics, by its very nature, seeks to expand itself, subsuming all aspects of life under its control. The ancient authoritarian state required forced labour and centralized planning to sustain itself. Today, he argues, authoritarian technics has evolved into a more sophisticated, insidious form—one that appears to promise abundance and convenience but ultimately strips away human autonomy.
“If I am right, we are now rapidly approaching a point at which, unless we radically alter our present course, our surviving democratic technics will be completely suppressed or supplanted.”
This is Mumford’s dire warning: that unless we actively intervene, democratic technics will be eliminated, leaving only a technological system designed to serve itself, not humanity.
The Return of Authoritarian Technics in the Modern Age
Mumford challenges the common assumption that technological progress is inherently tied to democracy. In fact, he argues, the modern industrial and technological system has revived authoritarianism in a new and even more effective form.
“What we have interpreted as the new freedom now turns out to be a much more sophisticated version of the old slavery.”
The very technologies that promised liberation—industrial production, automation, (and now digital and AI-driven systems) have instead created a new form of subjugation. He observes that while the Industrial Revolution coincided with the rise of political democracy, it also brought about factory discipline, bureaucratic control, and an increasingly depersonalized mode of existence.
Mumford describes how modern authoritarian technics no longer requires a visible king or dictator. Instead, power is embedded within the system itself—technocratic elites, bureaucracies, and corporate structures exercise control without direct coercion.
“The center of authority in this new system is no longer a visible personality, an all-powerful king: even in totalitarian dictatorships the center now lies in the system itself, invisible but omnipresent.”
The modern individual is conditioned by the logic of the machine: work is specialized, repetitive, and controlled by external forces; daily life is increasingly dictated by algorithms and impersonal institutions. In this system, choice is often an illusion—individuals are presented with endless consumer options but have little real control over the structures that shape their lives.
Technics as a Self-Sustaining System
Mumford’s most chilling insight is that authoritarian technics has become a self-perpetuating force, expanding for its own sake rather than for human benefit.
“To maximize energy, speed, or automation, without reference to the complex conditions that sustain organic life, have become ends in themselves.”
Technology, in its authoritarian form, no longer serves the needs of people—it serves the expansion of the system. Nations justify mass surveillance in the name of security, corporations justify invasive data collection in the name of efficiency, and scientific institutions justify unchecked technological expansion in the name of progress.
The consequences of this blind expansion are catastrophic: ecological destruction, mass surveillance, and the increasing displacement of human decision-making by automated systems. Mumford describes this process as a new kind of servitude—one where individuals willingly surrender their autonomy for the comforts provided by an all-encompassing system.
“The bargain we are being asked to ratify takes the form of a magnificent bribe.”
The bribe, in this case, is material abundance, convenience, and entertainment. But in exchange, people must conform to the system’s demands—accepting its structures, its values, and its limitations on personal autonomy.
Reclaiming Democratic Technics
Despite his dire warnings, Mumford does not believe this trajectory is inevitable. He argues that democratic technics, though weakened, still exists and must be actively defended.
“We must challenge this authoritarian system that has given to an under-dimensioned ideology and technology the authority that belongs to the human personality.”
What does this mean in practice?
Restoring Local Autonomy – Instead of relying on massive, centralized institutions, societies must rebuild local and community-based decision-making structures.
Human-Centered Technology – Mumford advocates for technologies that enhance human creativity and autonomy rather than replace or control them.
Ethical Science and Innovation – Scientific progress must be reoriented toward human well-being, rather than being driven solely by corporate and state interests.
Resisting the Logic of the Machine – Individuals and communities must reject the idea that technological expansion is inevitable and instead assert control over how it is implemented.
Mumford calls for a reintegration of human values into technological development, arguing that a future in which humans are fully subjugated to an impersonal system is not progress but regression.
“At the present juncture, if democracy did not exist, we would have to invent it, in order to save and recultivate the spirit of man.”
Mumford’s Relevance Today
Reading Authoritarian and Democratic Technics in the 21st century, it is impossible not to see its prescience. The digital revolution, artificial intelligence, and algorithmic governance have intensified the very trends Mumford warned about.
Mass Surveillance – The rise of digital tracking and AI-driven monitoring systems echoes Mumford’s concerns about authoritarian technics eliminating personal autonomy.
Corporate and State Technocracy – Governments and corporations increasingly shape human behaviour through algorithmic control, limiting genuine democratic participation.
The Illusion of Choice – Consumerism provides a sense of freedom, but the underlying structures of production, information, and governance remain deeply centralized.
Mumford challenges us to ask: Are we actively shaping technology to serve human values, or are we merely submitting to the logic of an impersonal, self-expanding system?
Conclusion: Choosing Our Technological Future
Lewis Mumford’s Authoritarian and Democratic Technics is a powerful reminder that technology is not neutral—it is shaped by the values and structures that create it. If technological development continues along an authoritarian path, it will increasingly strip individuals of autonomy and render democracy obsolete. But if societies actively resist this trend and cultivate democratic technics, technology can be reclaimed as a tool for human empowerment rather than control.
The choice is ours. As Mumford urges:
“Now let man take over!”
If you like my work and wish to be a part of it, then please consider a paid subscription
This is such a wonderful essay, Mumford was so right. We need to re embed technology into our societal values and take back control. The bigger lie of the system is There Is No Alternative, there is, and we need to highlight alternative examples.
Are we actively shaping technology to serve human values, or are we merely submitting to the logic of an impersonal, self-expanding system?
Now I wonder if I should avoid the self check out lines that are now normalized? Been in a McDonald’s lately? How do you order your food in McDonald’s?