'But if there is something fundamentally wrong within us, then technology makes it more dangerous.'
Yes, that's true. Can't argue.
I look at it this way- technology is a tool (and after all, every tool is a weapon if you hold it right). And you're right, neither defending nor condeming technology does anything, because it's inherently neutral. I guess that leaves people to worry about.
I think that the problem is this- everything's a power play. Who's got the most nukes, who can we attack in order to command the oil trade, imperialism, etc. But it's always been that way- maybe the lack of technology made it simpler, maybe not. But if you believe that man was made in God's image, hasn't he inhereted His destructive power along with His creative power? That creative power drives us to invent what we can- things that are both marvelous and dangerous. And we use those marvelous things to save lifes, improve life, to entertain people, to provide people with goods and luxuries. But we are also capable of killing just about everything in a flood of nuclear, chemical, and biological weaponry...
Problem is, once we see that it can be done, it will be done. That's probably just human nature, pushing the envelope. But in colonial America, innoculations were pushing the envelope- now they're law.
I guess I'm rambling here- and I guess it doesn't matter, because I don't ahve one final point to make, because I don't know. I don't really believe that people using technology as a murder weapon are evil- but I don't think violence is the way to acheive something. Mahatma Gandhi said that while we are constantly making new discoveries in the area of violence, he feels that much more unexplored opportunity exists in the area of non-violence. Hopefully that will be explored, because right now, war seems pretty emminent.
Maybe one of the reasons I don't put much stake in your argument is that I find myself generally unaffected by commercial culture. I don't find it difficult to avoid or ignore advertisements, and they really don't sway my opinions all too much.
'more economy, politics, industry, media, entertainment, art, and our pleasure always come first.'
Preserving nature doesn't put food on anyone's plate. The economy does. The economy is fueled entirely by industry, service, entertainment, the production and marketing of goods- would you want people who write, direct, and act in commercials to die of starvation? Our economy just happens to rest directly on a culture of entertainment and extraneous commodities. It's something that's probably never going to be undone, because for us, a simpler lifestyle means millions of unemployed Americans.
Chaotic crimes have always happened. There has always been a status quo for the "right" way to look. You can't blame everything on technology. Yeah, media can influence people- so can lots of stuff. My boyfriend, my parents, my classes at school- all of these things influence me. It has more to do with the way people interract, they way human nature works, than technology. The only thing technology really does is put it on a broader scope- this, admittedly, does lead to a certain homogenization- but it also leads to nationally and globally accepted standards. Two sides to every coin. There are all the negatives you speak of- but what of the positives?