The Technological Paradox: When Progress Is Not for Everyone

Technology should make life easier for the greatest number of people on the planet. However, reality shows us a radically different picture. In the midst of the digital revolution, with advances that would have seemed pure science fiction just a few decades ago, we find ourselves facing a disconcerting paradox: how is it possible that, in the middle of the greatest technological progress in human history, we are witnessing such marked social decline? The answer, although complex in its ramifications, is simple in its essence: normalized selfishness and individualism.

Technology possesses unprecedented transformative potential. It could allow us to work fewer hours, automate the most arduous and repetitive tasks, and free up valuable time for personal development, human relationships, and enjoying life. However, this promising future fades before the reality of a system that perverts each innovation to serve the interests of a few. The problem does not lie in technology itself, but in how its benefits are distributed. While productivity gains accumulate in the coffers of large corporations, workers remain trapped in endless workdays, even needing multiple jobs to make ends meet.

The resources that could be allocated to solving fundamental problems of humanity—hunger, disease, the climate crisis, educational inequality—are diverted towards projects that, although spectacular, are irrelevant to the majority of the world's population. More is invested in developing the next consumer gadget, the next addictive social network, or the next corporate surveillance system than in technologies that truly improve the quality of life for millions of people. Capitalism has turned technological innovation into a race to create artificial needs, products designed for obsolescence, and services that generate dependence instead of autonomy.

The most effective way to maintain this unjust system is through the perpetuation of a mentality of extreme sacrifice. The idea that it is necessary to live to work, rather than work to live, has been normalized. The hustle culture, extreme entrepreneurship, "sleep is for the weak," is nothing more than a sophisticated form of voluntary slavery. The illusion is sold that excessive sacrifice will eventually bear fruit, that someday the reward will be reaped for all those hours stolen from family, rest, life itself. But the reality is that for the vast majority, that day never comes.

Modern society has been structured as a ruthless competition where, as in any sport, only a few can win while the majority is destined to lose. But unlike a sporting competition, where the rules are clear and the referees impartial, in this social game those who set the rules are precisely those who have already "won." It is a system designed to perpetuate itself, where upward social mobility is the exception that proves the rule, not the norm. The few success stories that manage to climb from the bottom are amplified and mythologized precisely to keep hope alive in the rest, so they continue playing a rigged game.

After more than a century of unprecedented technological advances—from electricity to artificial intelligence, from antibiotics to genetic engineering—it is absurd that we are told we must work harder than ever. Productivity per worker has multiplied exponentially, but the benefits of this productivity have been captured almost entirely by the elites. The promise that technology would free us from tedious work to dedicate ourselves to more creative and satisfying activities has become a cruel mockery: now we compete with algorithms, we are monitored through applications, and we live dependent on productivity metrics that turn us into increasingly efficient cogs of a machine that does not belong to us.

The class structure is not an accident or a natural result of individual differences; it is a system carefully maintained through both legal and cultural mechanisms. The upper classes protect each other, pass opportunities among themselves, inherit not only economic capital but also social and cultural capital. Nepotism, often disguised as "networking" or "mentorship," ensures that positions of power remain within the same circles. Meanwhile, the myth of meritocracy is promoted so that those outside these circles believe that their lack of success is due to their lack of effort or talent, not to a system structurally designed to exclude them.

Each new technological advance, instead of democratizing power, concentrates it even more. Digital platforms that promised to give everyone a voice have become monopolies that control the flow of information. Less democra.net! Artificial intelligence, which could free humanity from repetitive work, is primarily used to optimize the extraction of value from workers and consumers. Data, the new oil of the digital economy, is extracted from us to enrich corporations that then sell us products based on that same information.

Meanwhile, resources and attention are diverted towards vain projects like the colonization of Mars, presented as the future of humanity when we have not even solved how to live sustainably on the only habitable planet we know. These pharaonic projects, driven by billionaires with delusions of grandeur, consume resources that could solve pressing problems here on Earth. But of course, it is more glamorous and newsworthy to talk about conquering space than about guaranteeing drinking water for everyone.

The direction humanity is taking under the leadership of this technological and financial elite does not bode well. The extreme concentration of power in the hands of individuals whose interests are completely misaligned with those of the rest of humanity leads us towards a dystopian future. A future where technology, instead of being a tool of liberation, becomes the ultimate instrument of control and oppression. A future where the gap between the haves and the have-nots not only persists but becomes insurmountable.

It is imperative that we question this model, that we stop accepting as natural or inevitable what is nothing more than a social construction designed to benefit a few. Technology has the potential to create abundance for all, to solve the great challenges of our time, to allow us to live fuller and more meaningful lives. The future of humanity cannot continue to be decided by a handful of individuals whose only metric of success is the infinite accumulation of wealth and power. If we fail to change this course, the technological paradox will not only be a historical irony, but the epitaph of a civilization that had all the tools to prosper and chose, instead, to self-destruct.