Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

Byron · 2003-10-03 12:56:43

Here's something to chew on...

I've just come across the term "technocracy" and it got me thinking about a possible "cutting edge" system of governance (either here on Earth, or more likely, Mars, as it would be a fresh start.) Basically what a "technocracy" is about is a system of governance based on rational, logical scientific principles. This would mean that any public money the government spends has to be based on cost/benefit analysis and fairness, and no group could be favored over another based on how people "feel." This means no "pork barrel" politics, no lobbying by moneyed interests and no government contracting (i.e., any work the government does has to be performed by public servants and the like). This system would alos require universal participation by the citizenry in how their community is governed. This would mean the the people would have the right, indeed, the obligation to vote on whatever the government decides on (in order to prevent a techno-tyranny from developing).

Personally, I think this would result in the greatest value for the tax dollar, and if this system could be really be made to perform based on true logical and rational principals, there would be no limit to what the community would be capable of doing, as they would be getting the highest possible value from the use of public funds and resources. It would eliminate virtually all corruption, as there would be no "closed door" meetings and back-door wheeling and dealing, and the entire population would be forced to keep up with everything that is being done in their behalf, further ensuring the transparency of the government. You would also have a constant exchange of information and ideas, just like you see among scientists and researchers today.

As for the details of how such a system could be put into place...why I don't I leave it up to you guys to toss out some suggestions?

B

clark · 2003-10-03 13:49:03

Basically what a "technocracy" is about is a system of governance based on rational, logical scientific principles.

Whose rational, and whose logical scientific principles would we use? Yours, or mine? :laugh:

Principles and logic are rationale, people are not. So how do you expect irrationale people, filled with the jumbles of everyday emotion, and making half-educated guess's (that's all we do by the way, take what information we think we know, and then use it to make reasonable assumptions) to run a system predicated on cold hard logic?

This means no "pork barrel" politics, no lobbying by moneyed interests and no government contracting (i.e., any work the government does has to be performed by public servants and the like).

So how does anything get proposed?

It would eliminate virtually all corruption, as there would be no "closed door" meetings and back-door wheeling and dealing, and the entire population would be forced to keep up with everything that is being done in their behalf, further ensuring the transparency of the government.

So instead of church every Sunday, we now have State review every Sunday to see what the goven'ment did the previous week, or what it's doing next week?

How do you deal with the fact that you would be forcing people to take part in the government process when they may not wish to? What value is there in punishiment of those who don't vote?

Free Spirit · 2003-10-03 17:48:50

From reading some of Howard Scott's ideas, who first coined and defended the idea of Technocracy, he hated the whole idea of money as he believed it was a bad allocator of resources (he thought resources should have been distributed based on more objective factors like energy production, etc.) A lot of his ideas were and still are way ahead of their time and won't be seen unless molecular nanotechnology and artificial intelligence make everything truly abundant and human labor as good as obsolete. I believe, if technology continues to evolve at exponential rates, we will gradually evolve into a Howard Scott style technocracy. Scott though seemed a bit naive on his "political-less" society. Humans and politics will always co-exist.

alokmohan · 2003-10-04 04:57:33

Technocracy or burocracy?That is the question.

Byron · 2003-10-04 06:52:24

Principles and logic are rationale, people are not. So how do you expect irrationale people, filled with the jumbles of everyday emotion, and making half-educated guess's (that's all we do by the way, take what information we think we know, and then use it to make reasonable assumptions) to run a system predicated on cold hard logic?

I guess this is something that we need to work on...indeed, if we're going to settle Mars, "irrationality" is something that has to be tossed in the rubbish bin. Intelligent, well-rounded people (the kind that would be settling Mars) really should know what makes sense and what doesn't, and provided that everyone has equal access to information, the community as a whole *should* be able to determine the most efficient method of governing their community.

So how does anything get proposed?

From individuals. There should be a system in place in which each person can state their opinion of what problems need to be tackled by the government, which would be looked at by a volunteer committee to see whether it's a valid complaint or not, whether others have the same opinion, etc, and if it survives committee and professional scientific evaluation, it would then go before the assembly, parliment or whatever to be voted on, which would then have to be "seconded" by the people themselves.

As for "mandatory" participation in the operation of their government, I think this is the only possible way to prevent tyranny in an isolated, enclosed environment such as you would find on Mars. Active participation in the running of their community should be part and parcel of each person's life...like working, eating, etc. As for those who are not willing to participate, they should be treated the same as those who refuse to work...be publicly shamed in public, such as having their mug plastered all over the local 'net as "non-participants." That should straighten out about 99% of them right there...and at virtually no cost to the community.

B

Bill White · 2003-10-04 08:44:19

A lot of his ideas were and still are way ahead of their time and won't be seen unless molecular nanotechnology and artificial intelligence make everything truly abundant and human labor as good as obsolete.

In Plato's Republic Socrates discusses three types of souls:

<1> Copper or bronze souls love money and material pleasure and seek such things more than all else.

Nano-tech and truly abundant material resources would indeed fulfill the demands/needs of the copper/bronze soul and remove the scramble for "wealth" from political life.

But,

<2> There are also silver souls, lovers of honor. People who pursue honor - - or status - - or maybe fame.

Infinite material wealth will not alter the reality that some people will be more "popular" or "famous" or "powerful" than others. By definition being "that special one" cannot be abundant. Being a champion athelete or the "most" beloved actor/actress cannot be abundant. Charisma? How can all people possess equally infinite charisma?

The classic Greek gods were immortal and lacked no material need yet were vain, petty and quarrelsome. Wars were fought between the "gods" over trivial slights to one's honor. Create immortal humans with infinite nano-tech wealth and that is what we will get, IMHO. Vain, petty and quarrelsome classical Greek "gods."

Not a pretty picture, IMHO.

<3> Socrates most praises the golden souls - - people who love philosophy (wisdom) more than pleasure and wealth and more than status, fame and honor.

We don't need no nano-tech to give ourselves golden souls. We can do that right NOW - - if we only choose to do so.

Bill White · 2003-10-04 08:56:51

This would mean that any public money the government spends has to be based on cost/benefit analysis and fairness, and no group could be favored over another based on how people "feel."

Abolish emotion from human behavior? Are you serious?

Byron · 2003-10-04 09:05:52

Abolish emotion from human behavior? Are you serious?

Of course not. But we should keep emotion and government as far apart as humanly possible, IMO.

B

alokmohan · 2003-10-05 05:02:17

Lord Byron true to your name you arepreaching aristocrcy.Sorrynow technology is administered by politicians.Example ,when china goes moon US technology and politicians will wake up to get a mars project.

Pat Galea · 2003-10-05 10:01:42

Basically what a "technocracy" is about is a system of governance based on rational, logical scientific principles.

The idea of a 'technocracy' scares the living bejeezus outa me.

Especially as I know exactly what rational logical scientific principles should be applied to society. I know for absolute certain that I am right...

... and I also know that I have believed this in the past and then realised I was utterly wrong.

As to the suggestion for universal participatory democracy (i.e. everyone votes on governmental decisions), from what I've read about places this has been tried, in practise the votes are dominated by those groups which have a strong dogma e.g. commies. They will be motivated to put the effort into each vote to achieve their ends, whereas the "comfortable neighbor" types, who subscribe to a wooly pragmatism, don't have the will or interest to devote time to researching each and every subject in the level of detail required to exercise their franchise.

Compelling people to vote doesn't solve the problem, as they are then voting either with superficial 'gut' feeling or randomly.

Bill White · 2003-10-05 13:11:59

The idea of a 'technocracy' scares the living bejeezus outa me.

Me too.

clark · 2003-10-06 09:07:25

Seperation of Emotion and State?

"It will cost more in resources and sacrifices to defend North Dakota from Canadian aggression than we might ever receive from retaining North Dakota. Therefore, based on simple arithmetic, and without the confines of emotion or principles, let us efficiently and expeditiously disband the State of North Dakota from our union."

"We find that some children are less suited for intellectual pursuits than many of their peers. It is foolish, and a mismangement of scarse resources, to try and educate these blatantly intellectualy inferior children to the same standard as the more gifted children. Therefore, based on simple arithmetic, and without the confines of emotion or principles, let us effeciently and expeditiously require that any child who does not pass certain State sanctioned academic tests, be denied future government subsides for free education."

Mmmmm.... love that taste in my mouth. How about you?

Josh Cryer · 2003-10-06 21:17:28

Once the Singularity comes around, it'll all be moot anyway.

clark · 2003-10-07 04:50:44

Josh, the Disciple. :laugh:

Byron · 2003-10-07 06:14:20

O.K. people....take your pick...California-style politics with our good friend Arnold, or a reasonable, sane government based on common-sense policies?

You've got ten seconds to decide...

B

clark · 2003-10-07 06:16:45

I take offense from the remark by the gentleman from Florida.

9... 8... 7...

Bill White · 2003-10-07 10:32:04

O.K. people....take your pick...California-style politics with our good friend Arnold, or a reasonable, sane government based on common-sense policies?
You've got ten seconds to decide...
B

Ah-noid wid Ah-nold, ah we?

Don't worry, if the Democrats were smart they would give Ah-nold six months to "govern" - - let him drop California's claims against Enron - - then push for an Ah-nold recall for the November 2004 ballot. If Ah-nold proves a bad a governor as many expect, then having a second recall election in November 2004 will be a real nightmare for the Republicans. And, since California is so screwed up, how can Ah-nold possibly do a good job? How could anyone solve all the problems CA has?

52% in favor of recall with 38% voting for Ah-nold would be a ticking time bomb for the GOP. Message to Representative Issa: "Be careful what you wish for. . . "

clark · 2003-10-07 10:36:34

The recall of Ah-nold, as you put it Bill , is already in the works. It's an absolute zoo out here. Anybody care to offer an outside assessment of who should lead my state?

Welcome to the left coast.

Pat Galea · 2003-10-07 11:56:49

Anybody care to offer an outside assessment of who should lead my state?

How about a system of governance based on rational, logical scientific principles?

clark · 2003-10-07 11:59:29

Oh, you mean like Florida!

alokmohan · 2003-10-09 07:08:39

Can we have a planet gov on earth as UN matters little?

Josh Cryer · 2003-10-10 15:09:25

Karl Rove wouldn't mind a 2004 Governer Recall. It would distract from the Bush reelection sufficiently enough so that his obvious blunders would be less noticable.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-13 04:03:41

Big Tech’s Surveillance Capitalism Is Killing Privacy
https://www.technocracy.news/big-techs- … g-privacy/

“Surveillance Capitalism” is a little-understood development that was defined by Professor Shoshana Zuboff in 2020. It was first used by Google to predict and control behavior, selling that information to others for a huge profit. Now, other companies are following suit and privacy is being shattered. ⁃ TN Editor
Despite recent advances in privacy measures that have disrupted online tracking, new highly effective tracking methods have been deployed by the Masters of the Universe, who have grown used to the megabillions brought in by surveillance capitalism.

They think some 14 yr old brother won't figure out how to fake IDs like Boomers when they were kids made fake IDs in the past and got their hands on drugs or alcohol?

Why are they allowing 12 yr olds and 5 yr olds to go online unsupervised?

You may soon need an ID to communicate online, under the guise of the bi-partisan "The Kids Online Safety Act"
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/03/k … ung-people

Orwellian China

‘They are going to starve to death’: Shanghai residents in lockdown with ‘no end in sight’
https://observers.france24.com/en/asia- … ntine-food

Our Common Agenda: “Multilateralism With Teeth”
https://www.technocracy.news/our-common … ith-teeth/

The UN’sOur Common Agenda is common to no one except themselves. It is propagandaized to stampede the world into Sustainable Development, aka Technocracy. Key to their plan is the total digitalization of the entire world and the UN is morphing into its new post-reset form. This is a must-read article. ⁃ TN Editor
Now is the historical movement of time, not only to fight the real virus, but to shape the system for the post-corona era. (Klaus Schwab)
Awaiting us is the total digitalization of the world. This agenda goes hand in hand with the mantra “Build Back Better” which has spread like wildfire among world leaders.
Our Common Agenda contains a number of recommendations on how the UN can be reformed in order to meet the problems facing the world today. Guterres begins the report by describing the serious situation:
We are at an inflection point in history. In our biggest shared test since the Second World War, humanity faces a stark and urgent choice: a breakdown or a breakthrough. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is upending our world, threatening our health, destroying economies and livelihoods and deepening poverty and inequalities.
This is paired with other crises and problems such as climate change, water scarcity, poverty, violence and discrimination. The picture painted is a crisis of Biblical proportions. If nothing is done, exacerbated crises await in the future. The report also points to “problems” such as failure to reach consensus regarding facts, knowledge and science.

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-04-22 15:07:29

Technocracy could be seen as good and bad, is it because of a threat to personal freedom it is seen as bad?

Blade Runner's world is without doubt one of fiction's scifi Dystopia. In the fictional world of video games, book and board games there is a thing called 'War Hammer' which has the ' Auretian Technocracy ' well trained technological independent cluster of planets with humans in a scifi setting, the main Empire was a Roman Emperor style Imperium with space ships and space marines, people wrote books and stories like a Robert A. Heinlein style universe, players enact battles using miniature models and the world was another scifi Dystopia universe. Some epsiodes of Twilight Zone or Doctor Who or the comicbook Judge Dredd and Watchmen are other examples of technocrat Dystopia's set during dark days.

https://fulllengthaudiobooks.com/james- … audiobook/

Mars Ho! The Technocrat Cult Of Outer Space
https://www.technocracy.news/mars-ho-th … ter-space/
Brazil Judge Says Apple Selling iPhone Without Power Adapter Is 'Abusive and Illegal'
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles … t-adapters

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-04-22 15:08:07)

Mars_B4_Moon · 2022-10-11 08:23:17

Cops post a DNA image of a suspect, but remove it after public criticism
https://verdadeufo.com.br/2022/10/polic … licas.html

Jasper - The Best AI Writing Assistant
https://www.jasper.ai/?fpr=oumuoswvdi

Why you may have a thinking digital twin within a decade
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-61742884

Does AI now write prediction or scifi?

'AI text, warning about the future of mankind.'
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XBlIFMT3xs

Last edited by Mars_B4_Moon (2022-10-11 08:24:56)

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#1 2003-10-03 12:56:43

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#2 2003-10-03 13:49:03

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#3 2003-10-03 17:48:50

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#4 2003-10-04 04:57:33

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#5 2003-10-04 06:52:24

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#6 2003-10-04 08:44:19

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#7 2003-10-04 08:56:51

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#8 2003-10-04 09:05:52

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#9 2003-10-05 05:02:17

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#10 2003-10-05 10:01:42

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#11 2003-10-05 13:11:59

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#12 2003-10-06 09:07:25

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#13 2003-10-06 21:17:28

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#14 2003-10-07 04:50:44

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#15 2003-10-07 06:14:20

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#16 2003-10-07 06:16:45

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#17 2003-10-07 10:32:04

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#18 2003-10-07 10:36:34

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#19 2003-10-07 11:56:49

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#20 2003-10-07 11:59:29

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#21 2003-10-09 07:08:39

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#22 2003-10-10 15:09:25

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#23 2022-04-13 04:03:41

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#24 2022-04-22 15:07:29

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

#25 2022-10-11 08:23:17

Re: Technocracy - Professional, scientific governance

Board footer