Technology in Colonial and Post-Colonial Histories, and Artificial Intelligence Today

Written By Nur Aksamija

Abstract

The rapid rise of Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology in the last few years, if not adequately regulated and understood with historical and social contexts, could have detrimental effects on people and the climate globally. The extraction of minerals necessary for AI and technological development as a whole is carried out through direct exploitation and harm to communities, in a manner that directly reflects and is linked to colonial structures of extraction. By understanding conceptions of a colonial history of technology, a critical analysis of AI’s role in our world today reveals the large-scale harms it causes if not addressed immediately and adequately. 

Key words: AI, tech, colonialism, mining, tech development

Image Source: WSJ: “Tenke Fungurume, a copper and cobalt mine in Congo, one of the world’s most mineral-rich countries.” Photo credit: Reuters staff/Reuters

I: Why AI, Why History, Why Now? - Introduction 

The bare minerals and materials used in our phones, laptops, and other technology are not just produced in factories; they are mined by hand by real human beings. As detailed in "Cobalt Red: How the Blood of the Congo Powers our Lives,” Siddharth Kara makes clear the reality of the cobalt mining industry, where hundreds of thousands of people risk their lives to mine in toxic and deadly environments, all so that mega-corporations in developed countries can obtain the materials necessary for producing the technology you are using to read this article. 

This cobalt is exactly the root driving force of rapid AI development. It is not only the input of minerals and raw resources of AI that is harmful; its output, the pollution from data centers, is as well. The use of AI, such as treating ChatGPT like a search engine daily or incorporating AI technologies into social media, is not driven by some impossible-to-understand technology as an intangible force. Rather, it is stored in physical data centers, one of which in Wisconsin, U.S.A., covers 1.2 million square miles under roof– and Microsoft alone is building over 400 of these centers across 70 global regions. According to Technology Networks, researchers found that at the current pace of AI development, carbon dioxide emissions would amount to 5 to 10 million cars, and water usage would equal 6 to 10 million American households. 

As taken from the FractChecker Alliance: “On July 24, 2025, the Trump administration unveiled 'America’s AI Action Plan,' stating: ‘Whoever has the largest AI ecosystem will set the global standards and reap broad economic and security benefits.’ The announcement signals an aggressive federal push to expand AI infrastructure, with major implications for fossil fuel energy use, weakened regulatory oversight, and environmental injustice.” Even beyond the horrific climate implications, “America’s AI Action Plan” shows how AI’s potential to fast-track development inequality, and the lack of power of everyday people to govern it, will prove to be detrimental to global society. 

II: Colonial Histories of Technology 

To consider the horrific human suffering necessary for the constant development of technology is incredibly misguided. In the words of Louise Boyle, Senior Climate Correspondent at the Independent, “For centuries, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, a landscape of near-unmatched natural resources, has been looted by colonizers: first for slaves, ivory and gold and then rubber, copper, palm oil and minerals.” It would be dreadfully misguided to assume, especially by those in the ‘Western’ world, that, simply because colonial-era empires have been dissolved, the power structures and legacies they manufactured have done so as well. 

III: “Europe, Technology and Colonialism in the 20th Century” 

In an article by Historian David Arnold, he seeks to investigate, from a postcolonial perspective, how perceptions of technology and its advancement were constructed during colonial eras. After establishing why this decolonial perspective on technology is essential, Arnold defines the scope of his discussion by identifying three main approaches that have previously been used to understand how the history of technology, in relation to Africa and Asia, has developed. The first approach is to equate technology with the evolution of industrialization in Europe and North America, therefore considering technologies in those regions as resulting from colonial intervention (86). The second approach is to evaluate the presence of technology in these regions as “...forcibly superseded by colonialism and international capitalism,” and therefore characterized by violence (87). The last is a ‘postcolonial’ approach, meaning historians must look instead beyond colonialism as a period to rather its aftermath (87). 

Yet, these approaches, put forward by historians to discuss the history of technology in such historically, culturally, and geographically diverse regions as Asia and Africa, as one monolithic group grouped solely by periods of colonization, remain highly Eurocentric, as Arnold also agreed. Therefore, he proposes a reversal of this paradigm and argues that “the history of Europe and of its technology cannot adequately be understood except by reference to the world outside Europe” (88). 

This understanding that the current ‘developed’ world would not have been possible without the exploitation of the colonial era, which continues today, is crucial, especially regarding the increased use of AI. AI, so far at every step of its progress, if not changed, will continue to enforce post-colonial global power structures, magnify climate concerns, rapidly worsen global inequality, and those in the ‘developed’ world are complicit when falling to tech consumerism. 

IV: Where now? - Recommendations

It is undeniable that the most significant strides would be taken with increased domestic and international regulations limiting the use of AI technology, primarily through greater dialogue and negotiations with private megacorporations. 

  1. Governments must increase domestic and international regulations on the usage of AI technology. Direct availability for constructing data centers without regard for local populations, unlimited access to AI, particularly built into social media, and no cut-off points for emissions are all possible focal points for regulation. 

  2. Establish enforceable environmental frameworks and policies that promote equitable and ethical technology use by governments. This should be done both internationally and domestically, to ensure that compliance mechanisms and proper enforcement is in place. 

  3. Companies must cease relying on exploitative supply chains, and governments must focus on regulating these practices. Nationalization of mining sites, greater regulation of transnational mega corporations, and the inclusion of civil society, particularly labor and human rights groups, are necessary to change who controls where our technology comes from. 

V: Recommended Further Reading

‘Digital colonialism’: how AI companies are following the playbook of empire, by Jessica Russ-Smith and Michelle D. Lazarus, The Conversation. November 25, 2025.

Bibliography 

Nur Aksamija
Next

Youth’s Refusal To Accept A Broken Social Contract, Part I