Dickydarn wrote:Probably you know nothing about the subject. Here is a starting point for you http://www.archive.org/details/TechnocracyStudyCourseUnabridged That is the basic information. Not the stuff that Kolzene posts here the TTCD material. I can see you are misinformed.
The information is simple and direct. Here is more background of the group that first came up with the idea http://www.eoearth.org/article/Biophysical_economics
It has zero to do with your thoughts on it though. Sorry.
Well no doubt technocrats are unaware of my thoughts or the observations from which they are derived so there is no reason for a counter-argument to be present in their material. I have looked over the Study Course, I skipped the early part which judging from chapter headings in just an uninteresting overview of various science subjects on which I need no instruction. I have also skipped over the sections critiquing money and markets for now, I'll look at that later, because while this is where the voodoo starts to kick in it isn't really material to where technocracy fits in terms of political decay. So I have read the last three chapters which carries the meat of the technocracy design. In those last three chapters I see plenty to confirm my designation of it as utopian bureaucracy and only one or two things that suggest it might aspire to being a something higher up the model of political decay.
First the indicators that it might aspire to be something other than bureaucracy:
The technocratic social design has a fairly conventional pyramidal power structure which indeed has a single executive at the top, the continental director (a monarch of sorts) and immediately below a board of directors of "best" men, the continental control board, which appears to be akin to an aristocracy. The "monarch" however is chosen by the continental control board and so is effectively hobbled to the interests of the board which makes the board effectively
higher than the monarch, so the design is not a monarchy. Could it be an aristocracy then? If it were aristocracy the aristos would have effective
control over those notionally below them. The basis of this could be loyalty, ownership, coercion or some combination of the preceding. The technocratic design makes no mention of from where the authority of the board comes so that seems to make the control board as superfluous an authority as the continental director. So the monarchic and aristocratic potentials are in fact notional and not effective.
We need not discuss the possibility that it is democratic since the design very explicitly forbids mob leaders from having authority.
That leaves only bureaucracy or anarchy. It isn't anarchy by intention
for there is plainly an intent for there to be order and stratified control. By a process of elimination it is once again bureaucracy.
Another way to discover where it lies on the political decay model is consider which people or factions of people would be most able and interested in imposing
it over the current political order. In the context of America that would be either the political class of mob leaders and their supporters or the civil service factions. The mob leaders derive their authority from the financial and vocal / voting support of business factions, religious factions and all manner of ordinary people. None of these would have any interest in supporting the imposition of technocracy so the mob leaders can be safely discounted as a possible vector for this political order. However the civil services could conceivably have an interest in technocracy as it allows as an operating ideology for the massive expansion of their own operations to include every facet of human activity. Moreover as many civil service factions are supremely well armed they have the ability
to impose it, all that is required is for them to finally slip the already frayed democratic leash held by the mob leaders.
Technocracy is therefore an enabling ideology for the decay of democracy into bureaucracy.