What do you think?
Rate this book
Digital Degrowth: Technology in the Age of Survival
The world is racing toward an irreversible ecological catastrophe. Environmental science clarifies that humans must reduce total material resource use, requiring a radical redistribution of wealth within and between countries. Yet more attention must be paid to how the digital economy fits into this equation.
Michael Kwet, a leading expert on digital colonialism, presents a new framework for the digital society. Merging the science of degrowth with a global analysis of the high-tech economy, he argues that digital capitalism and colonialism must be abolished quickly.
In Digital Degrowth , Kwet maps a path to a people's tech future. He calls for direct action against Silicon Valley, the US Empire, and power elites everywhere to realize a radically egalitarian digital society that fosters equality in harmony with nature.
Michael Kwet, a leading expert on digital colonialism, presents a new framework for the digital society. Merging the science of degrowth with a global analysis of the high-tech economy, he argues that digital capitalism and colonialism must be abolished quickly.
In Digital Degrowth , Kwet maps a path to a people's tech future. He calls for direct action against Silicon Valley, the US Empire, and power elites everywhere to realize a radically egalitarian digital society that fosters equality in harmony with nature.
- GenresTechnology
320 pages, Paperback
Published August 20, 2024
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
May 9, 2026
This book tied together many ideas I am reading up on and presented them quite clearly. Of course, the section on digital degrowth itself stands out. Very informative, and still far too overlooked. Fuck Big Tech, including Microsoft indeed...
“Since I’ve joined Yale, I can’t remember hearing a single presenter utter the words “American Empire.” Imagine trying to explain the motion of the planets without accounting for the sun. Long story short: the tech pseudo-left is analytically and morally bankrupt.”
“People have never been able to create economic equality through persuasion and without conflict. There are no examples of movements trying to abolish class without violent resistance from authorities.”
“Every major organization - from universities to retail chains - has a top brass in charge that appropriates worker labor and consumes more than their fair share. They need to be challenged everywhere.”
“Those who want Degrowth will have to force the issue through unprecedented levels of strikes, direct action, and civil disobedience. Degrowth will not become a reality without a serious fight.”
I quite liked it in the end, as it gives some guidelines on how to break the conventional ways of thinking: of course, education alone is not enough, especially when there is no dissemination of research to the public, if there is no actual connection between intellectuals and the majority, and if there is no track record of success.
Education, then, is not about writing books and talking in lecture halls, but perhaps thinking about new school curricula, and talking through mediums and platforms that reach those who are suffering, like investing in radio communication in the Global South, where many still cannot read.
He also pointed at some uncomfortable truths and interesting concepts in a very clear way, covering stuff like the false US vs China narrative, ecological debt, carbon debt, military tech, neo-apartheid, elite academics (not only Naomi Klein), the BDS movement, etc.
It’s also one of the few books that does some serious name-calling and shoots the names in the head: corporations, institutions, universities, news outlets, countries, publishers, and individuals…
And indeed, we seriously have to question research that is funded by the elite. One can’t take money from the business as usual and expect to be really critical. In the end, he draws attention to the need for bottom-up activism and disruption, which can arguably not remain peaceful in the face of such sheer oppression. It’s not naive to think about violence in the face of the climate crisis; it’s about looking at the actions taken thus far and drawing some painful conclusions.
We should also question the endless cycle of journalists adding anecdotes and a view into a corner of the problem, yet without talking to the majority, without naming the murderers, and without calls for action. This stuff is nothing new. So who is it for? What is it really about? Is it a form of waste?
And finally, perhaps I should also slow down with reading books myself, and turn more to the streets. Last week I sold 280 books, and I got a mere 70 euros for them (I should start stealing books like Abbie). Information storage has a passive quality, whereas information sharing can be transformative. What am I really about? Do I just want to be smart and aware of my surroundings, still able to position myself above the rest, enjoying the view, or do I also want to see the lives of people change? I guess it’s a mix, one that in the last six years or so I have felt actively shift towards the latter. I have become more radical, not just in what I read but in the actions I take in the quotidian, and I am curious to see how far this can go. In the end, it’s perhaps not necessarily one or the other (books or streets), but the imbalance is real, one I think we here on Goodreads can all think about…
“Survival is our strongest instinct. We need to rebel before it’s too late. Let’s get this going.”
“Since I’ve joined Yale, I can’t remember hearing a single presenter utter the words “American Empire.” Imagine trying to explain the motion of the planets without accounting for the sun. Long story short: the tech pseudo-left is analytically and morally bankrupt.”
“People have never been able to create economic equality through persuasion and without conflict. There are no examples of movements trying to abolish class without violent resistance from authorities.”
“Every major organization - from universities to retail chains - has a top brass in charge that appropriates worker labor and consumes more than their fair share. They need to be challenged everywhere.”
“Those who want Degrowth will have to force the issue through unprecedented levels of strikes, direct action, and civil disobedience. Degrowth will not become a reality without a serious fight.”
I quite liked it in the end, as it gives some guidelines on how to break the conventional ways of thinking: of course, education alone is not enough, especially when there is no dissemination of research to the public, if there is no actual connection between intellectuals and the majority, and if there is no track record of success.
Education, then, is not about writing books and talking in lecture halls, but perhaps thinking about new school curricula, and talking through mediums and platforms that reach those who are suffering, like investing in radio communication in the Global South, where many still cannot read.
He also pointed at some uncomfortable truths and interesting concepts in a very clear way, covering stuff like the false US vs China narrative, ecological debt, carbon debt, military tech, neo-apartheid, elite academics (not only Naomi Klein), the BDS movement, etc.
It’s also one of the few books that does some serious name-calling and shoots the names in the head: corporations, institutions, universities, news outlets, countries, publishers, and individuals…
And indeed, we seriously have to question research that is funded by the elite. One can’t take money from the business as usual and expect to be really critical. In the end, he draws attention to the need for bottom-up activism and disruption, which can arguably not remain peaceful in the face of such sheer oppression. It’s not naive to think about violence in the face of the climate crisis; it’s about looking at the actions taken thus far and drawing some painful conclusions.
We should also question the endless cycle of journalists adding anecdotes and a view into a corner of the problem, yet without talking to the majority, without naming the murderers, and without calls for action. This stuff is nothing new. So who is it for? What is it really about? Is it a form of waste?
And finally, perhaps I should also slow down with reading books myself, and turn more to the streets. Last week I sold 280 books, and I got a mere 70 euros for them (I should start stealing books like Abbie). Information storage has a passive quality, whereas information sharing can be transformative. What am I really about? Do I just want to be smart and aware of my surroundings, still able to position myself above the rest, enjoying the view, or do I also want to see the lives of people change? I guess it’s a mix, one that in the last six years or so I have felt actively shift towards the latter. I have become more radical, not just in what I read but in the actions I take in the quotidian, and I am curious to see how far this can go. In the end, it’s perhaps not necessarily one or the other (books or streets), but the imbalance is real, one I think we here on Goodreads can all think about…
“Survival is our strongest instinct. We need to rebel before it’s too late. Let’s get this going.”
May 2, 2025
Read this for a book club meeting, skimmed through most of it. We agreed it was quite incendiary and probably intended to draw attention and build "credit" to the author. The facts and figures were really great to put the harsh realities into perspective, and I appreciated the parallels to historical colonialism to illustrate the modern digital ecocide and human rights violations. Wasn't too sure about the proposed solutions, but it's a start
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews