Questions on Technocracy

So a Technocracy is basically just having all parts of a society/economy ran by experts in those fields?
so basically a two tier society with one tier being the proles and the second tier being the planners?
is it possible for a Technocratic society to be leftist/socialist in nature? or would it basically be a Neo-Feudal society?


An ideal technocratic society would have a structure in place to ensure that only the highest educated in positions of power. If it was ran with little corruption, the proles and the planners would be indistinguishable.

Of course ideal societies don't exist.

It could be leftist or/and socialist but most likely Neo-Feudal. This is an inherent flaw in most authoritarian systems as corruption, nepotism and power consolidating is incredibly common, likely and will always happen over time. If the proles don't get any education, technically the nobility are the most educated.

If we want an ideal technocratic society, we would need a heavily monitored, structured and difficult test to determine these planners.

TL;DR: Yes.

All systems are authoritarian. Nice trips tho.

Please don't try to summon Howard Scott

Technocracy is expression of class interests of petty-bourgeois, just like fascism, but more from technical, engineering side than from humanities-religious part of this class. I used to be a technocrat when I was studying robotics, just like many of my friends and even lecturers, but later I became socialist when I found that was caused by my class blindness and views typical for my muh privileged class.

Pretty much.
Only the economy would be mostly self managed by a specialised national computer network (think a modern, autonomous form of Cybersyn).

A Technocracy is effectively classless, as everyone* is placed in the position that they are best suited for.
Everyone* has a function that they are expected to perform to the best of their ability.

*(Obviously phasing out human employment in most positions is a high priority)

It cannot be socialist, no.
As for leftist, that would depend on just how generous you are with that you consider 'leftist'.

For what it is worth, I have been a personality on this board for years due to a number of broad similarities that Technocracy has with leftism.
I suppose that I do personally consider Technocracy to be some-sort of extremely hetrodox form of leftism.

And I would ask that you stop using that term.
It is utterly abused to the point of being meaningless on this board.

No it would not.
What you are describing is a Veblenist society.

All functions in a Technocratic society would be assigned by a review of all candidates personal character, health and Demonstrated Technical Ability (DTA).

Utter rubbish.
Please attempt to educate yourself on a topic before making such stupid statements.

I consider these sort of threads rather analogous to bat-signals for me.

Yeah, right. Just like Mussolini was radical and revolutionary, in middle class meaning of that words. Technocracy is dead and less potent version of fascism, why we even still discuss it seriously?

Really? I've only seen a video presentation but it sounded more left-wing trying to distance itself from the word socialism but with a technology fetish.

A technocratic society could be socialist if and only if instead of humans, the planner "tier" was just robots.

Yes, It is run by the professionals based on their talents and experiences instead of the useless politicians. It is something like this to give you a good idea what it is like.

No they will be employed based on the merits.

It is not possible because it is a radical form of meritocracy. White or Asian would perform well in the technocratic society.

it's for "rule of the skilled" you illiterate moron.

Its stalinism but with more science.

Can it actually work without some sort of omniscient job assignment system? Because the current way of people fumbling and finally finding something that suits them, shit as it may be, at least has the element of randomness that lets people believe that if they don't make it it's only their fault. But with a supposedly perfect system in place, all the fuckups will be blamed upon it, and I think it will lead to torches and pitchforks sooner or later. Even if the objective condition of people would be orders of magnitude better than currently.

So it's techno-eusocial?

embrace the future user.

How would you implement this in such a way that would prevent nepotism and consolidation of power?


there is the 'only scientists and engineers should rule cos they are teh smartest and objective and only look at the REAL facts not stupid ideology'-technocrats
and then there are those who are into radical meritocracy, which is cool in and of itself - I think the real problem in this type is the need for an institution to acknowledge and ascertain 'merit' or capability. There would have to be some very strong mechanism to avoid institutional inertia and the following stultification, paradigmatisation and stagnation.
In fact I would say my aims and motivations are closer to those of technocrats, I just think socialism has a better chance of achieving those aims than a political technocratic movement.

While the model proposed by Technocracy inc did call for such a system.
My personal model allows for people to freely apply for any open function(s) that they meet the requirements to apply for.
A selection board then screens all of the candidates and selects the most suitable for assignment.

You have to remember that at the very top of the agenda is building a new culture.
An element of that is getting people to internalise that in a fully, perfectly meritocratic society, the only one to blame for failure is oneself.
If one 'goofs off' during their educational period, it is their own fault if they are stuck as a PFC, toilet cleaner for the remainder of their national service period.

I suppose that is one way to describe my ideology.

You will have to be more specific if you want a detailed answer.
But one of the primary defences against such things is the cultivation of a service of ideological fanatics that could best be described as a mix of political officers, secret police and a general anti-corruption force.

Italy is already structured in that way.

No, it is not in any way.
Italy is a rather standard neo-liberal state and has nothing to do with Technocracy.

The Technate Shall Rise Again
Mostly, Scientists and Technical Pioneers would be at the helm of society. That being said, lower leadership roles would indeed be held by their contemporary elites. With the exception of business/economy, which would be structured by those at the helm.

Maybe, this parts is mostly an unknown since the largest Tech-movement died before it's ideas could be explored. That being said, vertical movement would not be impossible since such a society would push you to specialize, and as such, so becoming a planner/leader is not impossible.

Depends on how much control is that the top vs role of corporations.

The OP was quite right.

Simply putting scientists and 'technical pioneers' in charge is Veblenism.
Indeed it is borderline Palo Alto worship.

But it did leave behind a great deal of freely accessible writings on its ideas.
Some sort of two class system is quite explicitly not a part of them.

There would not be any corporations.
Technocracy has always been presented with a fully planned economic system.

Please do more then just read a Wikipedia entry before you attempt to present your positions with any degree of authority.

Fuck off back to >>>Holla Forums

Jews don't want the energy accounting to become new currency. You should know that.

There is no way that the jews will let Technocracy become a reality.

so people should be qualified for a job?
weeew, what an original idea

it's not like you needed an engineering degree in the soviet union to get some technical management position
and it's not like you need an engineering degree to apply for an engineering position in any corporation right now

yeah, "autonomous"
only existing autonomous economic mechanism I know of is the law of value
and I see no reason to believe there can be another one, apart from the scifi tier scenarios where general purpose AI took the role of the GOSPLAN, which would still technically be non-autonomous, because it would be a consciously planned economy by a conscious AI

besides, the whole point of production for use is a conscious economic planning
not some blind force of nature guiding economic activity

not if you think bureaucracy is a class

you've just stated full employment as your political and economic goal
weeew, totally didn't hear this before

who would review candidates?

in other words

there's only one right answer to that question - democratic control and accountability and also periodic from-the-bottom purges

Technocracy is a meme ideology for hip tanks