1 Rhizome Introit. Technologies as Instruments of Coloniality in the Midst of a Globalizing Era

In consonance with the novel semantics we want to make explicit the denomination of rhizome, an insurrection where instead of sections formed by: introduction, methodology, results and conclusion imposed by the mechanisms of traditional publications; the inquiry that we begin does not obey to the modernist methodologies; but to a transmethodology; a complexification of the traditional methods, a decanting of its reductionism. What are transmethodologies? They are those that "affirm the need for confrontation, (...) for the construction of vigorous, strategic, transcendent, complex and fruitful problematics" (MALDONADO-TORRES, 2019, p.203). These are antigeneologies, in this case complex, that complexify and transcend reductionism and the outdated modernist-postmodernist-colonial research. The subjectivities of the author; that is: sentipensar, experiences, faith; among others, are not prohibitive as in the traditionalist inquiries where the supposed objectivity appeared unrestrictedly.

With rhizomes, the idea is that

No point of origin or first principle that governs all thought; no significant advance that is therefore made by bifurcation, unforeseeable encounter, re-evaluation of the whole from an unprecedented angle; no principle of order or privileged entry in the path of a multiplicity (^{ZOURABICHVILI, 2007}, p.94).

Rhizome is the title of a chapter in Deleuze, Gilles and Guattari, Feliz Mil Mesetas. Capitalism and schizophrenia; where it is stated that "in a rhizome there are no points or positions, as in a structure, a tree, a root. In a rhizome there are only lines" (^{DELEUZE; GUATTARI, 2002}, p.14). Constitutive lines, where the conclusions are not the final part of the research but openings to the inquiry, in the introitus we can be talking about the transmethod.

Therefore, in the inquiry there is a coming and going, a rhizomatic complexification that bifurcates the constitutive path of the discourse, where the research subject is an agent of change and its subjectivities are essential; making worthy decoloniality in the conceptions of research as liberation from coloniality. This is the imposed project continuation of colonization, imputed in the South with the invasion in 1492 and modernity as imposition and project of civilization; of course colonization begins with all of this.

The author is liberated with rhizomatic research outside modernity as a paradigm of avoidance, thus her sentipensar and her first-person experience participates in the research; it is a decolonial inquiry. Decoloniality is the flip side of coloniality, liberation as a project that begins at the very moment of the oppression of peoples. However, coloniality continues its oppressive mechanisms with globalization and the North in an imposition of how to live, be, be educated, do and of course think; how to live and coexist; full of exclusion in all senses; that with technologies permeates its claws and mechanisms increasingly rejuvenated to mark its impositions. Coloniality until today, as in the last five hundred years, is more recondite and perpetual than colonialism, imposed in 1492; although colonialism set the guidelines for coloniality.

The types of coloniality: of power, knowledge, being, doing and dreams, are explained below and are particularized for technologies insofar as explaining their mechanisms of circumvention, supposed civilization, thus understanding decoloniality and its project of liberation of the victims in every sense, not only people. As for the coloniality of power, for ^{Quijano (2015}), the coloniality of power is a concept that accounts for one of the founding elements of the current pattern of power, the basic and universal social classification of the population of the planet around the idea of race; inasmuch as the race of the civilizations of the South before the West are inferior; that is why after the invasion and massacre in 1942 they justify their actions in favor of their mentioned civilization that we needed because we were not adapted to the modernity they imposed, and that we are doubly guilty for opposing it (^{DUSSEL, 2008}). The coloniality of power reveals that the West did not "un-cover" us but rather "en-covered" us, subordinating and inferiorizing us to ensure and justify their exploitation (DUSSEL, 2008).

Decoloniality, then, continues as the antithesis and liberation of the:

The modernity that begins with the invasion of America by the Spanish (...) is the geopolitical opening of Europe to the Atlantic; it is the deployment and control of the "world-system" in the strict sense and the invention of the colonial system that for three hundred years will slowly tilt the economic and political balance in favor of the old isolated and peripheral Europe. All of which is simultaneous to the origin and development of capitalism (^{Dussel, 2004}, p. 139).

According to this author, modernity, colonialism, the world system and capitalism are aspects of the same simultaneous and mutually constitutive reality of overlapping. The coloniality of power imposes what is good, what is convenient to the world system of avoidance, to Eurocentrism; this fierce coloniality has made great people feel that their power to know, what they carry in their genes is inferior and since colonization imposed its macabre plan of civilization with good reason. With technologies, what is convenient is imposed; but technologies open gaps to use the soft and persistent decolonial education in favor of the South, of our culture; it is a weapon that we can use in favor and we will see it later.

As for the coloniality of knowledge, we have lived up to now in the regularization of truth and of what is not truth; it is not by chance that the knowledge of the South is classified as inferior, not scientific, not knowledge; abysmal distance between knowledge and knowledge; ^{Lander (2000}) refers that the coloniality of knowledge is the hegemonic force of colonizing thought, it is imperative to unveil the immense destructive capacity that has had that knowledge in mathematical knowledge, for example, not recognizing the contributions of the cultures of the South, imposing a Western mathematics valid only for them to teach, and how to teach it.

It should be noted that not only with mathematics, but with any knowledge imposed in injectable packages in the minds of people regardless of their subjectivities; imposed to leave them out of education, because they did not pass through the edge of what coloniality calls scientific. In the same way, it is done by transmitting with technologies what should be known; the uncovering of sex, immorality, the decomposition of families, the evils of humanity; all of them are transmitted by technologies; where there should be an ethical moral vigilance of teachers, families; because in the same way that the Internet can decide what to consult and learn; also without due vigilance it can damage the morals, customs and ethical life of children; in fact that happens. The coloniality of power, knowledge is understood as the succession of epistemology and the frequent tasks of knowledge creation under the regime of domination of colonial intelligence (^{VALDEZ; ROMERO; GÓMEZ, 2019}).

Currently, scholars of coloniality point out that:

The coloniality of knowledge would imply a kind of epistemic arrogance on the part of those who imagine themselves to be modern and consider themselves to possess the most adequate (or even the only) means of access to truth (be it theological or secularized) and, therefore, assume that they can manipulate the natural or social world according to their own interests. Other forms of knowledge, generally associated with non-European populations, are dismissed as ignorance, belittled, inferiorized or, on certain occasions, appropriated by the European theological, philosophical and scientific knowledge production apparatuses (^{RESTREPO; ROJAS, 2010}, p. 137).

And with this, they manipulate technologies so that they become the instrument of manipulation in every sense; from the right to medicines, the media, industrialization, among others.

As for the coloniality of being, which is a consequence of the coloniality of power and knowledge (MALDONADO-TORRES, 2007), the ravages and impacts of the lived permeate the being; it carries it like a cross that has been difficult to remove by the imposition and daily maneuvers of the mechanisms of oppression. We are from the South, born of the South but with capitalist thoughts, the mind of a colonizer; imposition of sobriety in favor of joy. Wanting to be like those, in a double transculturized life.

There is a coloniality of doing, which of course is related to the others, which is not the coloniality of being that often differs from doing; doing is closely linked to the appearance and fashion nowadays, as the models of social representations that we have from the North, and technologies are mechanisms and instruments of transmission of such models; which are always in favor and have the mark of the convenience of the domination of the elites, with different features and well-defined proposals. The conceptual figures would be the imposition of the modernist project for corporeal-manual chores, which displace the original skills (^{VALDEZ; ROMERO; GÓMEZ, 2019}). There is, for example, in terms of television as a technology or pattern called telecoloniality

Audiovisual devices have become a network of mediations that update the coloniality of seeing at a time characterized by cognitive capitalism, the communications era, image technologies, visual culture, cultural industries and the Western incorporation of the other in the context of globalization (^{LEÓN, 2012}, p.116).

This author recommends that decoloniality should promote powerful strategies in visual studies to carry out the pending tasks left by the anti-imperialist and anticolonialist movements in the field of Latin American cinema and art in order to build a transmodern visual culture, to promote our forgotten culture and make it reach the other side of the world. For this, the state and rural municipal media must be questioned so that they permeate the decoloniality of what they promote.

As for the coloniality of dreaming, ^{Quijano (2014}), if there is a mechanism of avoidance that technologies promote, it is the coloniality of dreams, the way in which relationships are imposed: sex, culture, coexistence, travel, dances imposing the Western, the privilege of communication of the big companies of Northern cinema, the culture of capital, the appearance of carrying brands over what is produced in the nation. Friendships and their promotion of the banal, of immorality. It is used to promote dreams that have nothing to do with the realization in our South, with our culture. As for video games, violence is imposed, winning over happiness; parents leave in the hands of technological devices the education of their children and the recreation of their minds; they forget the popular games of our community spaces; and play to the highest bidder the carrier of the brand cell phone over the lack of mastery even of the mother tongue; carrying technology is confused with wisdom and development.

In terms of communication, technologies are of excellence, but we must make an effort in terms of decoloniality:

It is necessary to renew communication research in Latin America, taking as challenges to explore innovative topics, other methodologies and new approaches. There must be a direct connection with everyday reality, nurturing the motivations of researchers in this field, seeking alternatives for production, as well as perhaps implementing their own dissemination strategies. Communication research will advance by leaps and bounds in the continent as long as there is an interrelation with shared responsibility between researchers, universities, companies and the State (^{GONZÁLEZ-SAMÉ; ROMERO-RODRÍGUEZ; AGUADED, 2017}, p. 16).

In what follows we will continue to justify decoloniality as a necessity for the construction of research and transmetology that manifests the transmethod (^{RODRÍGUEZ, 2020}).

2 Rhizome Transmethodology. Complex Objective and Transmethod Critical Discourse Analysis

We ask ourselves: Are there possibilities for using technologies decolonially? Of course yes, "decolonization today implies ending those constraints and restoring the humanity of the subjugated; that is, to reestablish the human sense of communication in concepts and practice" (^{TORRICO, 2017}, p.32), in that technologies can be used to unveil in the first place colonialities in their different expressions, and unveil that hidden other to which Enrique Dussel has been making reference in contrast to the supposed discovery that they made to us.

As for the network, Maldonado - Torres has coined the term "decolonial practices of the network" (^{MALDONADO - TORRES, 2013}, p. 133); he also proposes the challenge of inhabiting the information society from the decolonial option; it is about raising through the use of technologies of a decolonial collective agency where the network, in each place, has an attitude of resistance, reaction and influence against the processes of delocalization, assimilation or cultural imposition that in coloniality try to dominate society (^{KARAM, 2016}).

It is necessary to consider the advances, the contributions of technologies and give them the due decolonial conception that is sought in this research; for example, decolonizing communication, in short, means "to stop seeing communication and its field through the eyes of technocracy, the market, blinded faith and political control, to recover the liberating content of its meaning and praxis" (^{TORRICO, 2015}, p.61). Thus, technologies are what we make of them, if the user carries the baton of decoloniality, it is possible to achieve decolonial essences and strategies for their use.

That is, under decolonial thinking, generating criticism in the analysis of technological devices, institutions and practices related to the production of discourse within the interviewees, questioning their contributions, introjecting colonialities in their discourses (^{LEÓN, 2012}), this inquiry is justified in getting from the critical analysis of the discourse that is explained in the rhizome to come, voices of interviewees and the research subject to propose decolonial critiques that allow liberations in order to use technologies in favor of the decolonial project.

The research is carried out in the transmodern project whose object is the decoloniality of knowing, being and thinking whose complex objective was to analyze the technologies in the decoloniality of knowing, being, thinking, doing and dreaming as panacea or utopia; from the critical analysis of the discourse as rhizomatic transmethod. It is unique in the line of research entitled: transepistemologies of knowledge and transcomplex transmethodologies. It is rhizomatic, thus the rhizome denominations in the sense that "this implies that there is no single method and even less a single path, so it cannot be "disqualified a priori". These references on the rhizome are very important, as they stimulate a thought of multiplicity, insofar as rejection of a point of origin" (^{SICORENE, 2017}, p. 91); this indicates a contraposition and the declaration of insufficiency of research divided into the structures: introduction, development, results and conclusions; as we stated at the beginning of the research.

The author expresses that the research is transmethodical and reiterates once again her definition as it is outside the modernist-postmodernist-colonial paradigm, the transmethod, the critical discourse analysis (CDA) in particular, is not due to statistical studies of sampling selections by probabilistic methods, the interviewees consulted and interested in the research participated here. The researcher constructs in the transparadigmatic research in the first person with her sentiment-thinking, where spirituality is not religion, but modes of resistance in the face of avoidance. It is about deep faith of the researcher. Where ACD can be seen as a reaction against the dominant modernist paradigms, characterized as asocial or uncritical (^{VAN DIJK, 2016}).

In contrast to the avoidance, beyond the modernist bonds of research where God is outside of them, we are rescued by Christ from the darkness of humanity we are against religions used as avoidances in coloniality in which Catholicism was imposed with consoling adorations; and not of greatness in our lives in an I can, I am loved, I am not alone and defeated! We must leave the confusion that leads away from Christ, from fear, from ethics and responsibility before God's creation: the earth-country; to promote Christianity as a religion is a mistake. As a non-modernist author I can express myself in the transparadigm.

We unite the awareness that we are spirit in a body, an energy that is not destroyed; a communion of God with the earth and us with Him, "but you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you may proclaim the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light" (1 Peter 2:9). Why do we demythologize Christ and in some research and schools and take the Bible to the prisons? It was convenient for the colonizer, the colonialist, the overlooker to impose the minimization. And for these reasons the Sacred Word of God, the Bible, is used to make you accept your defeat and the pain that you had to live.

Again we answer: Why critical discourse analysis as a transmethod in research? First of all, transmethods go beyond methods, they are complex and transdisciplinary conceptions of these decolonially, that is located in the transmodern project. The transmethod denotation is from ^{Rodriguez (2019}). Secondly, the transmethod critical discourse analysis situates the analysis of traditional discourse in a social, educational, political and critical perspective, channeling the way in which the discourse is used and to legitimize the resistance, the critical and political of the same as the re-linking is urgent; the ACD, "understands and defines the discourse as a social practice (...) and from that conviction initiates and justifies its discursive analysis as social analysis" (^{SANTANDER, 2011}, p. 209).

Of course, in the criticality of discourse analysis, the transdisciplinary communication of this CDA emerges, which in its complexity makes it transcomplex, complex and transdisciplinary; it should also be noted that the CDA is located in the representations of discursive structures that represent, confirm, legitimize, transcribe or challenge the relations of abuse of power or domination in life in the coloniality of technologies.

The critical discourse analysis as a liberating transmethod of the solayations of the modern-transmodern project (^{RODRÍGUEZ, 2020}), transmethodical research liberating the research subject, his subjectivities. The ACD from its very nature is recognized as the first transmethod transcomplex and in accordance with the planetary decoloniality perspective and objective of transmodernity; the theoretical structures of the sciences associated with social phenomena are defined by a communicational and language perspective and, finally, because every researcher "must criticize concepts, elucidate terms, build definitions and (...) handle thought operations linked to logical-linguistic structures" (^{PADRÓN, 1996}, p. 10). All this permeates the discourses of the interviewees in order to clarify, as far as possible, the coloniality of technologies, their decoloniality and possible contributions to the transmodern project.

The ACD is based in this research on two sources: the sources of the texts consulted, as we have been doing in the previous rhizome that continues and the one carried out in the interviews to specialists of decoloniality of technologies, PhD students of the Post-doctorate in mathematics teaching of the National Experimental University of Yaracuy, Venezuela, with studies currently in decoloniality, with open questions on decoloniality and technologies, and they were voluntary collaborators to answer the questionnaire. They were asked the following questions in the interviews: what is their experience with technologies as a remastering of knowledge and promotion of forgotten cultures; can technologies be managed in favor of the decoloniality of knowing, being, thinking, doing and dreaming of overlooked civilizations; is the use of technologies a permanent instrument in the continuity of the coloniality of knowing, being, thinking and dreaming from the West and the North; and how to inhabit the information society from the decolonial option to promote the power of cultural identity? In each of these questions, they were asked to be explicitly.

In what follows we pass and interconnect the complex discourses of the interviewees by means of the CDA.

3 Rhizome Voices of the Interviewees. Technologies in the Decoloniality of Power, Knowing, Being, Thinking, Doing and Dreaming

We will analyze from the ACD the answers of the interviewees of the four (4) questions, answered by six (6) people in total, and we will do it question by question, regarding what is their experience in technologies as remastering of knowledge and promotion of forgotten cultures? As for interviewee 1, he states that he has experience in technologies, that some years ago he participated in a project for the incorporation of a module in the Warao populations, Venezuela, he states "we worked with a team of professionals: psychologists, sociologists, doctors, educators of basic specialties. The experience was very interesting".

As for interviewee 2, he states that "with the advances in technology, the way we teach has also changed, and the incorporation of technologies to the teaching-learning process implies that we must integrate these new tools to promote ethnomathematics"; he recognizes the need to build a learning environment to promote the indigenous, from our context and towards the search for solutions based on our realities.

Interviewee 3 affirms that "technologies are a possibility of interaction with the students that I have used as a suitable means to exchange reflective experiences that point to the encounter of the subject with himself and his colonial identity", to be able to involve in him or them the recognition of their state to allow them to rescue their identity suppressed and ignored by coloniality. What this interviewee affirms is clearly important, since it is recognized the need to first identify the colonial in the student in order to decolonize him or her.

Interviewee 4 points out that "technologies represent innovative, decolonial experiences for me, insofar as the decolonial mentality with which I have used them has allowed it"; the realization of workshops, conferences, the impact of audiovisual materials for the Wayuu community. She points out that the promotion of her research has permeated the collaborative help of technologies; as a mathematician I feel happy to help them develop more and more in favor of promoting our culture and everything that comes from it. Also, the different harmonious ways in which the didactic material I produce has been promoted. Right now I could not be answering this questionnaire without google forms and its platform would allow me to do so. Technologies do what the user with his coloniality or decoloniality uses them to do. It is that the technological object will carry the coloniality to the extent that whoever makes it and whoever implements it, the more then the one who uses it is colonized.

Interviewee 5 was very categorical in his answer to the question "What is your experience of technologies as a remastering of knowledge and promotion of forgotten cultures? He answered that in spite of the technologies there are forgotten cultures, the own ones of America, he affirms that much more than forgotten, almost lost. Regretting it very much every minute of losing autochthonous languages for example that could be remastered and safeguarded with the technology; but the states do not charge preeminence for the autochthonous thing. There is a decision with our aborigines, they use them and take them into account as folklore at some time of the year for the respective photos, or parades. But, with the technologies we could collaborate to the improvement of their lives and this is not done.

Interviewee 6 stated that "the use of technologies has always been a very useful tool in the development of academic activities in different ways (simulators, resolution programs, resource creation programs), the subject matter is part of each individual", he affirms that it depends on what you want to communicate, what you want to promote. It is interesting to use these tools to give a different face to the situation without losing the essence of the original, the forgotten. But it is important to know that technologies are not only a means to communicate, but also, for example, to save lives; are they available to everyone in such cases?

Regarding the question: how to inhabit the information society from the decolonial option to promote our cultural identity? Here in response, interviewee 1 states that "the most important thing is the rescue of the human being. It is impossible to think of decoloniality, of transmodernity when we continue to use the same teaching scheme as in the 14th century. The terms are not what is relevant, the names can change, but if we continue to do the same thing, we are taking the water to the same mill, affirms this interviewee.

Interviewee 2, in response to the question states that "the answer lies in the acceptance that we are social, biological beings, that we are part of an environment, of nature and therefore we must be part of an ecosystem in which our decisions affect the other, and therefore society", that is why we must open our eyes to the acceptance of our culture, with its successes and failures, understand that we are not a carbon copy of other societies and that as a society we have much to contribute and have our own paradigms and paradigmatic models. This answer is convincing, since the contribution of the information society to our favor will depend on the cultural identity that we value.

Interviewee 3 responds that the Latin American subject in order to "develop decoloniality today needs a training process, therefore it is necessary to review theories, works, experiences that provide this being with an understanding of decoloniality as a basic process for the development of peoples", He goes on to affirm that networks should be promoted as an ideal means to share experiences, cultures, identities, ways of doing things from each locality or local production entity that allows the inhabitants to promote the sense of their culture, their identity, their history, their dances, gastronomy and other tasks that are part of their local identity. The networks as motivators for intercultural encounters and the recognition of human activity as an essence.

Interviewee 4 states that it is urgent and necessary to seek "every time technologies are used, the coloniality of being, thinking, being and dreaming that we could be promoting with them. It is imperative the decoloniality of the human being in order to promote with forceful facts in such information society". Thus, it is urgent the transepistemological vigilance of the knowledge we promote; because with our colonial mentality we could be using the information society to promote what is foreign in an acculturation and be leaving what is ours at a disadvantage. Let us use the information society to remaster what is ours, to promote forgotten cultures anywhere in the world. In the same way, for example, I could be studying Mayan and Egyptian mathematics; promoting the Mayan ones very strongly.

Interviewee 5 answers how to inhabit the information society from the decolonial option to promote our cultural identity: "to know and analyze our own knowledge" we know that this is the first step, but it does not stop there, the decolonial option needs education, and for this in our cultural identity we need education to promote our culture, which requires prepared professionals so that the use of technologies is not a panacea, for a while as a fashion; and then they continue being an instrument of coloniality.

Interviewee 6, when answering the question in question, said that "life stories should be told with some technological, interactive tool, since the idea is to promote what has been overlooked, what is our own, what is ours, only that the impact is what we want to tell so that those who receive the information are impacted by it"; it is of vital importance that such actions are constant and that professionals are trained so that this can be lasting in time.

Regarding the question: can technologies be managed in favor of the decoloniality of knowledge, being, thinking and dreaming of overlooked civilizations? Interviewee 1 affirmed that "technologies are a means, a means where almost everyone knows something and thinks he owns it, the same as medicine"; then we must take advantage of such reality to know and promote our culture, our ways of living, the environment, our cultural and natural heritages in order to feel that we own them so much that we can safeguard them.

Interviewee 2 affirms that "yes, of course! technologies can be used as a means of diffusion, as a support and in some cases as a method of verification of the emergence of overlooked civilizations". He does not explain how this could be achieved; but interviewee 3 says that "technologies are managed by the human being, that is why it was mentioned before, so that he can promote decoloniality he must first understand himself in it, know where the decolonial project is going and what should be the human actions that he must develop to try to successfully achieve the involvement of others in this event".

Interviewee 4 affirms that "technologies can be used to promote what is ours, our culture; that it has already been responding to it", while interviewee 5 affirms that "yes. Interviewee 5 adds that the use of technologies "should always be in function of promoting what is ours, with a real vision of what happened in colonial times, we were invaded, we were influenced from all aspects to be like them, there was resistance but we fell and we tried to get up". It is an option of resistance in the face of coloniality that we can all rise up and follow the decolonial path safeguarding what is ours.

Regarding the question: can it be affirmed that technologies are permanent instruments in the continuity of the coloniality of knowing, being, thinking and dreaming from the West and the North? Interviewee 1 affirms that "I do not understand the question"; but interviewee 2 is clear on this, and affirms that "technologies, used in a good way, can be allies in this continuity of the colonialism of being, everything is in the intentionality, in the use given to these instruments". Neither of the two interviewees was clear in recognizing that of course, as we have been analyzing, technologies are permanent instruments of coloniality; and that it is also necessary to build our own technologies in favor of the thinking of the South.

Interviewee 3 affirms that "for a long time technology has been at the service of coloniality, with clear and forceful messages from those who have the power, control and order of the world"; and that is why the best technology produced, used and promoted by European countries is observed, a clear message is there, that is why everything that is observed through the networks is the reiteration of a binary culture before the Latin American countries, with their inhabitants and their ways of doing, thinking and understanding themselves in the world.

Interviewee 3 continues stating forcefully to the question that all electronic devices, web pages, technological advances, and marketing of technologies continue to colonize knowledge, acting obediently before a binary action of the others who are only compulsive consumers, of the best cell phones, equipment or other artifacts that give them more cache before a consumerist society and devourer of themselves and others. Even today, through all the studies of the coronavirus, it has been revealed how the technological means of communication have produced encounters, recreation and leisure, but with emphasis on technological platforms that only those with greater economic resources have access to, and the poor, the excluded and always overlooked are forgotten.

These are the words of interviewee 3 in response to the question "Can it be affirmed that technologies are permanent instruments in the continuity of the coloniality of knowledge, being, thinking and dreaming from the West and the North? Colonial thinking and feeling continues to grow, in an age that seems not to grow old in the face of subjects trained for their and the reiteration of power, is decoloniality necessary then, of course it is, but with emphasis on technological platforms that only those with greater economic resources have access to, and the poor, the excluded and always ignored, are forgotten. Colonial thinking and feeling continues its growth, in an age that seems not to age in the face of subjects trained for their and the reiteration of power, is decoloniality necessary then, of course it is, but with an emphasis on technological platforms that only those with access to those with greater economic resources have access to, and the poor, the excluded and always ignored are forgotten. Colonial thinking and feeling continues to grow, in an age that seems not to age before subjects trained for their and the reiteration of power, is decoloniality necessary then, of course it is? of course it is.

Interviewee 4 goes on to state that, of course, "technologies are currently the most powerful instrument of globalization, of the North and the West, for the continuity of the coloniality of knowing, being, thinking and dreaming". He affirms that, what do we dream of nowadays every time we use technologies? What do we get, for example, in terms of travel destinations? Which places are promoted with more force? What do they promote to us? the culture of consumerism, what do they promote to us as being better human beings? the culture of having. How do we imagine ourselves happy? Being great human beings, serving others? What do they impose on us as citizens from the technologies? Do they promote us as citizens of the world that we came to serve, Christian duty? As for sex, what do they impose on the youth? All this is delicate care to value and decolonize as citizens and professionals that we owe to education, peace and happiness.

Interviewee 5 affirms in response to the question "Can it be affirmed that technologies are permanent instruments in the continuity of the coloniality of knowledge, being, thinking and dreaming from the West and the North? "Yes. But they never replace the personal encounter, the affections and knowledge of people", the interviewee is talking about the important face-to-face education where affections emerge and the face-to-face exercises a human power; computers, for example, do not embrace. And the interviewee agrees that yes, but that "we must use their weapons to defend ourselves, redirect them to counterattack with influential thinking, creating learning spaces, using our own and telling them here we are with their weapons and we use them in this way".

In the following rhizome, the conclusions, convergences and divergences of the interviewees with the research subject become more complex; this is the essence of the critical analysis of discourse as a transmethod, where the research subject has a great burden of contribution with his subjectivities and experiences to the research.

4 Rhizome Opening Answers, Conceptualization. Technologies in Decoloniality: Panacea or Utopia? Complex Responses of the Research Subject and the Interviewees

Faced with the question that many times the interviewees have complexly answered, with their experiences with technologies, the colonial and the decolonial, the convergence with the subject author of the inquiry is categorical, that technologies can play in our favor; and that this should be a utopia or a path to walk; not meaning with this that it is an impossibility; but to recognize and be vigilant that every day the dominant powers will invent new technologies and new uses of the already existing ones to sustain themselves as the dominant power in the world.

And that in the matter of technologies it is necessary to be alert; because when a dominant system tends to decay it seems to emit another system that tries to displace the dominance for him to take the control and to continue trampling the cultures that they call less developed, even many underdeveloped and even uncivilized. The world has in its political and economic systems a taste for the elusiveness; the human being in his sin and the non-recognition of God has to recognize contemporary gods to the convenience of the prevailing system.

It is urgent to recognize and not to forget that we can have a colonial situation without a directionality of the colonial ones, it refers for example to the coloniality that among the own congeners of the South can occur, it refers to "(...) the cultural, political, sexual and economic oppression/exploitation of racialized/ethnic subordinate groups by dominant racial/ethnic groups with or without the existence of colonial administrations" (^{GROSFOGUEL, 2006}, p. 29). An example of this is the domination of the so-called non-Aboriginals over the Aboriginals and imposed assimilation.

Thus, we must strive to be manufacturers of humanized technologies, more friendly and inclusive. It is important therefore, that a few avid for change go to the baton to form new generations in technological matters; of course with our tools, in favor of our culture. In which the media are promoters in favor of our education and cosmovisions.

We must promote from the communications technologies answers in favor of our cultures, environments, natural and cultural heritages; as one of the interviewees questioned: what do we get for example of destinations to travel? What is promoted with more force? That our products are promoted in all the regional and national media. What do they promote? That we promote the culture of safeguarding, respect, consumption of our local products, that we are promoted as better human beings? the culture of being, wisdom and communion with our fellow human beings. How do we imagine ourselves happy? That we imagine ourselves happy being supportive and inclusive; respecting the entire homeland, with affability and respect for the homeland, being great human beings, serving the other. What do they impose on us as citizens from the technologies, that they impose on us the respect for solidarity, the no superiority between cultures; the respect for the environment, do they promote that we are citizens of the world that we came to serve, a Christian duty? It is important such promotion in the fear of God and respect for his creation, the transcendence of life, return to the initial questions: Who are we, what is our role on earth?

As for education, channel, plateau of construction of lives in constant development we must be attentive in the use of technologies in the decoloniality of power, knowing, being, doing and dreaming, as a utopian task, the road to walk; we know the cultural difference. But the good, the respect, the right to be in diversity; the right to enjoy such humanized technologies for the personal and collective good must always be a task of vigilance in its fulfillment.

The interview questions, to which the author is also challenged, must be questions and answers that are always asked and challenged in education. the following questions in the interviews: what is your experience with technologies as a remastering of knowledge and promotion of forgotten cultures? Can technologies be managed in favor of the decoloniality of knowing, being, thinking, doing and dreaming of overlooked civilizations? Are the use of technologies a permanent instrument in the continuity of the coloniality of knowing, being, thinking and dreaming from the West and the North? How to inhabit the information society from the decolonial option to promote the power of cultural identity?

Therefore, teachers and families must be clear and precise that technologies as means of education and entertainment carry an intentionality of the manufacturer, of the administrator. But this purpose can be decolonized to the extent that we understand that they do not replace people, educators and parents. They are only instruments that must be learned to value ecosophically, with the necessary wisdom with the anthropoetic formation, that of the human race that has been execrated from education, from sciences; therefore from life.

The contents of the networks, the Internet for example, must be monitored in the children to be consulted; these networks cannot be the educators that fill the minds of our children with pornography, with anti-values; forgetting the physical contact, the affection, the embrace; the enjoyment of the games in company in the favelas, in the popular habitat; on the contrary, these must be remastered to reach the most remote place and there can be cultural exchange as the mere fact of enjoying and not imposing.

Technologies in education cannot be the center of teaching; it cannot be that the contents, that their adaptability and management be forgotten in exchange for sharing platforms that we surely get on the Internet in exchange for their management, usefulness, adaptability to what is convenient to learn, to what is true in the contents that are imposed on us. And in favor, the great variety of technological means in favor of learning environments should be used to favor the diversity of learning styles. The times and ways in which students are enthusiastic to learn in media that apparently do not punish; this should lead to demystify in the teacher his outdated training.

Technologies in terms of environment, medicine, and more humane means to facilitate people's lives should be a motive of struggle in government policies so that they reach everyone and so that they can promote the construction of their own technologies. We must be vigilant that the technologies, however favorable they may be, do not violate our culture, do not undermine our environment, do not pollute the rivers, no matter how convenient the exploitation, the care of crops: transgenic crops that can do so much damage. There is a limit to the technologies; an adequate use; a pertinent production and that limit must and can be given by human beings with their ethical reason for being in and with the world.

Planetary decoloniality must be a motive of acceptance in diversity and not imposition of cultures and ways of living in the midst of avoidance. If we can decide in favor of the humanity of the homeland-earth. Of course, the dehumanization of technologies corresponds to the human being; its dehumanization comes from the fact that the civilization of humanity is really in the prehistoric stage of the human spirit; as the firefly of knowledge tells us; Edgar Morín.

5 Final Rhizome. Conclusive Openings in the Line of Research

We have complied with the analysis of technologies in the decoloniality of knowing, being, thinking, doing and dreaming as panacea or utopia? from the critical analysis of discourse as rhizomatic transmethod. Our transmethodology under the protection of transmodernity with the transmethod of discourse analysis has given a turn to the analysis; now complex, ecosophical, deeply decolonial; attending to planetarization as a counterface to the decolonial possibilities with the South without the North, without the West. That would not make sense, it would be committing errors of exclusion of the past.

Technologies are there, they are here to stay, the world is mediatized many times in favor of the human being; many others in favor of the colonial system. On whom does their humanization depend? Initially it depends on its user, who does not always have the age and maturity to differentiate the good from the bad, with a decolonial mind, free of ties to its ethical use safeguarded with humanity and in favor of the collectivity and remastering of our culture, in the respect and consideration of the Other. We prefer in the question from the title for the utopia instead of the panacea; we want to say with it again: decoloniality with the use of technologies is a path to walk that is possible; as well as its due formation in governmental policies, family and actors of education.

Let us be vigilant then that not everything is convenient to learn, that anti-values permeate the world; that this does not reach our families, the educational institutions; we must be watchful of what is convenient or not. To the technological artifacts that colonize us and make us more inhuman every day; let us be in favor of those that make our lives easier, of those that save lives; of those that can make a more humane world.

I say goodbye, as in the transparadigmatic research in which the research subject expresses his sentipensar, freed from the authoritarianism of the modernist-postmodernist-colonial paradigm; with the word of God that illuminates in his deep wisdom, I send you that this line of research entitled: transepistemologies of knowledge and transcomplex transmetodologies, is also made by walking, that the author is freed from her subjectivities in the transparadigmatic research. Let us always swim in the sea of uncertainty with the word of God that enlightens: as a Christian, in the spiritual ecosophy, the word of God that enlightens: "All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for discipline in righteousness" (2 Timothy 3:16).