>The hard part is creating a viable alternative culture that can make collective choices about technology use.
This alternative culture is impossible under capitalism, where the tendency is for any and every technology to be acquired and applied in the service of the already rich and powerful.
The tendency exists for sure, but there is nothing supporting the claim that it’s impossible. The Amish themselves are an example. Also there are other eco villages and communities that have managed.
It seems like they have chosen to abstain from capitalism and have been allowed to exist because they don’t represent a threat to the capitalist order.
Also, by definition, if collective choices are being made about the use of technology, then it’s not capitalism.
You have a bizarre and manifestly incorrect view of capitalism.
Collective choices get made within capitalism all the time. Corporations, clubs, cooperatives, unions, associations, etc, cities, counties, countries, etc, are all legally established collective choice making groups. There is also nothing preventing people from forming their own groups by free association.
ahem Cooperatives and unions are by definition not capitalist.
The key feature of a capitalist enterprise is that the workers and the owners are not the same group. This is in contrast with a socialist enterprise, where the owners and the workers are the same group.
There is a ton of stuff preventing people from forming their own groups. Have you seen how companies (see Amazon & Starbucks recently) react to people attempting to do so?
This alternative culture is impossible under capitalism, where the tendency is for any and every technology to be acquired and applied in the service of the already rich and powerful.