Much is being debated about 5G technology at this time. The Chinese are ahead with trials and applications and some Western companies are using their technology. Governments, especially the American one, have put a stop to Chinese technology. The doubts raised are national security problems, espionage by other countries.
Instead, we see the situation from a different angle: the recognition and use of scientific discoveries and technologies. The western world has developed and enriched thanks to scientific and technological discoveries. Science has never posed the problem of where scientific or technological discoveries come from. Industry has always adapted to technological innovations. At the base of everything there was and there is the objectivity of scientific or technological discovery. The only forces that sometimes opposed and oppose each other are ideological in nature: religious or philosophical.
The geographical reference point as a center of research and discoveries, from the Middle Ages onwards, we have Europe. Then we added the United States, which has been in the last century, and still is, at the forefront of science and technology.
In recent years, to the historical industrialized countries, China has been added as a producer country becoming, in about 30 years, the factory of the world. The country has also invested in technology and research and, with 5G, is the country with the best technology and ahead a few years compared to the West.
The refusal to use Chinese technology, apart from security (partly pretext) and geopolitical considerations, leads me to the historical assessment of the choice.
For one of the first times in history, if not the first, the West rejects cutting-edge technology for ideological reasons. The risk is to have a countries that isn’t cutting edge for a few years.
5G is perhaps the first major example of large-scale technology where the West does not have supremacy: referring to the last centuries of history
We can imagine that other innovations will follow and we will have to confront from now on with the East or with other nations not aligned to the West. Or rather, we will have to deal with different political and geopolitical systems where the West will not be at the forefront of scientific and technological discoveries.
The rejection of technologies or scientific discoveries from non-Western countries (communist or not) puts us in a position we have never had in the past. We oppose, that is, discoveries by the pure spirit of supremacy that we do not accept to be overshadowed by other nations. Particularly in this position are the United States, which is completely out of step with what it considers to belong to it by right: technological supremacy. But rejecting other discoveries fails the classic doctrine of science and economics that has always opened the door to innovation. Is this scientific obscurantism covered by geopolitical problems?
The future will present other problems of this kind if we examine the number of graduates in scientific subjects SPEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics).
With reference to the year 2016 we have ( given by Statista.com):
China 4.700.000 graduates
India 2.600.000 graduates
EU 908.000 graduates of which 140.000 UK (Italy 62.000) (year 2012, European Commission data)
United States 568,000 graduates
Russia 561,000 graduates
Iran 335,000 graduates
Indonesia 206,000 graduates
Japan 195,000 graduates.
We can therefore expect a scientific and technological development, in the years to come, greater in countries such as China and India than the consolidated Western system.
Will we always react in the same way by banning innovations?
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.