ninurta wrote:It still sounds alot like communism
There are some economic similarities that would be eventual in both, such as the centralization and restructuring of resources, but the scientists came up with idea explicitly to divorce the rules of governing technology from politics and place it with a group of experts, which has also given people the conception that technocracy is an oligarchy of some sort. Its even been compared to the Futurists movement of Fascist Italy, which is a real stretch, but the confusion is understandable. Technocracy could fit within a social democracy, a nationalistic fasces, communism, socialism etc. It is as odds with capitalism, but that is not a form of government either. The main reason for the idea was to deal with the problem I described in my last post, which, the originators thought would lead to an elite class controlling technology and using it to create a scarcity of recourses for a lower class that would no longer be needed in the work force, instead of using technology to end that scarcity, which technology, given the time and careful use, could do in the distant future.