This piece is the final in the of the series on transhumanism. Previously, I wrote about the philosophy itself, its implications, and the hedonistic imperative. Now though, it is important to understand the political and sociological implications of transhumanism.

Whether it is fully realized or not, many degrees of transhumanism are inevitable. In the history of humans, rarely has there been a technology which we conceived and created and has then gone unused. Furthermore, the technology which catalyzes transhumanism is already in use, like prosthetics, gene therapy, and pharmaceuticals. Moreover, that which hasn’t been created yet is being energetically researched, like immortality. As I have said before, we ought to begin this conversation before it’s too late.

Firstly, what happens if body-augmentations were to meet a capitalist economy? There is a rabid obsession for efficiency and growth, and this would no doubt combine with bio-hacking to create ‘ideal workers’. If full automation doesn’t come first or isn’t wholly adopted, the consequences for workers and unions could be grave. Imagine laborers with bionic arms outcompeting people who refused augmentation, lawyers getting memory enhancements to get the edge on the prosecution, or rival gang cyborgs in a constant arms race with each other. Non-augmented unions might pop up, but has history has shown, technology and greed have beaten back the labor movement many times.

Then imagine an employer investing in an employee’s body by buying augmentations to improve their performance, or taking out a loan to buy an enhancement you won’t be able to work off. The beginnings of transhumanism coalescing with the late stages of capitalism would be a time of crisis.

Secondly, what happens if body augmentations were to meet our class system? The wealthiest would have first dibs on all transhumanist technology. The ‘pure-blooded’ aristocracy have always viewed their children as having some kind of natural superior intelligence or ability, even though that is never the case. But aided by gene-editing, they could truly create designer children to be smarter, more resilient to addiction or pain, better looking, and happier. A socio-economic divide could have the potential to create a biological divide. And just like with wealth, this cycle would entrench itself further and further.

Thirdly, what happens when the state can subsidize this technology for itself? If the military did not fully automate with drones and other remote technology, they could create enhanced soldiers to more effectively carry out their will, whatever that may be. The police force could create officers with more strength and endurance than any criminal, but simultaneously, any protestor or dissident. Imagine a financially and biologically entrenched oligarchy bolstering a state that looms over the non-augmented. What could happen to egalitarian ideals? Would revolution be feasible? Would there be any hope for a society free from oppression?

Then, how can we avoid this dystopian future, while still leaving room for all the good which this technology could deliver us? The answer is in anarcho-transhumanism. Anarcho-transhumanism is the pursuit of transhumanism and the new humans it could usher in while rejecting the state and capitalist markets as a means to achieve it. Anarcho-transhumanists believe in the future of post-humans, but realize that if society continues to exist as it does now, oppression will only flourish under transhumanism. Not only do they propose a radical reworking of our biology, but also of our governments and economies. Otherwise, the future would be grim.

The future is ambiguous though. As mentioned before, we cannot guarantee whether any particular technology or ideology will be embraced or jettisoned. Regardless, the anarcho-transhumanist critique still stands. Whatever the future may hold, now is the time to be ruminating on these issues, lest we find ourselves in crisis, and eventually in ruin.