Emulsifying your enemies' internal organs (or design under capitalism)
By Arun Pradhan
From that very silly Commonwealth Bank logo to the handle on your fridge, you can be pretty sure that a professional designer had a part in shaping your environment. Coming to the end of a degree in design studies, I still have problems defining "designers" — perhaps the most useful reminder was a lecturer telling us: "Sell them what they want; after all, we're not artists!".
We were told by a tutor in first year that our job was not always to design the "best" or "most useful" thing, because this was rarely wanted.
He gave the example of chairs in many McDonald's which have immovable body contours. Most people find this comfortable in the first five minutes, but when they feel like changing their position, they find that the seat won't let them. It is all part of snaring the initial customer, getting their money and then getting rid of them as fast as possible, ready for the next victim.
There are park benches in the United States which are specifically designed to make "undesirables" (homeless people) who try to sleep on them roll off.
The tutor had worked for a large Australian barbecue company. His main claim to fame was designing a new model which, he was told, had to have a part deteriorate within two to three years of purchase.
Not just any old part. It had to be important enough to ensure that the consumer would go back and buy a replacement part, but not expensive enough to tempt them to ditch the whole thing and buy a competing brand.
Most people would be more familiar with this scenario in relation to cars. Indeed, you could pick almost any field, and a bit of investigation would reveal how designers are used to maximise profit rather than produce something useful.
In the field of architecture and project homes, we know how to build passive solar homes which are cheap and could cut domestic energy consumption considerably. The project home companies are proud of this fact, boasting their "five star save the planet" energy ratings.
Unfortunately, this does not go much further than an advertising gimmick. Although the display home might be energy efficient, when it is built in a new context, with a different orientation and without proper regulation, it can actually use more energy than average.
Perhaps the most telling role of designers was given in a recent lecture called "Universal Soldier", which charted the role of some of the richest, yet anonymous, designers on the planet — those who work for the US defence industry.
It seems as though US government agencies are making the art of mass killing more efficient and professional, complete with mission statements and suggested management plans for war.
Their web sites explain that new bullets are being designed in consultation with the UN Declaration of Human Rights and that their designers are "improving the quality of life" for the US soldier.
They are making a shift from using soldiers as mass cannon fodder towards trying to design and train a soldier who is a single unit of mass destruction. The extreme example of this is a hand-held weapon that can launch a nuclear warhead.
Yet, rather than kill people, the US army is intent on maiming. This has the psychological advantage of the injured, screaming in pain, acting as a warning to others. Even more to the point, it takes up much more of the enemy's resources if they have to move and shelter "a disabled fighting unit".
This opens up a huge problem for US designers: how best to maim lots of people?
As creative as ever, they came up with a range of ways which are in different stages of experimentation. There are lasers which blind enemy soldiers, acoustic weapons which destroy their inner ears and make them unable to walk or balance, and the microwave weapons which emulsify internal organs while often leaving the victim alive.
One of the latest researches is into an electronic pulse weapon which breaks the electric circuit in the enemies' brains, causing them to "short out".
Who knows how many of these will see the light of day and where? One indication is the "foam gun", which fires foam at its victims, leaving them stuck until it is chemically dissolved.
Initially developed by the US Defense Department, the gun is now thought to be a potential boost for internal security in "riot situations". You could probably expect to see one at a demo near you, but they still are ironing out a few little bugs, such as the possibility of allergic reactions and suffocation.
Of course, most of the lecturers provided this information with the recommendation, "Please remember ... use your design skills on the side of goodness and not evil".
Some might think the world's problems are a product of some "rogue designers" who sold their soul to the dark side. For me, this course has been yet another reminder of this society's massive contradictions. While enormous creativity and design ideas exist, much of this is focused on selling, profit making or destroying.
It says a lot, not only about the insanity of capitalism, but also of the potential for a system not based on profit, where such creativity could be used for the benefit of humanity.