[B0ycey]

@B0ycey

Thank you for the clarification.

Also I feel offended that you called Rei a Technocrat. As an actual Technocrat I would like you not to associate it with fascism given that it is directly opposed to fascism.

@Oxymandias I personally don't associate Technocracy with Fascism, but Rei, from my limited time speaking with her, was a Technocrat. Just an unusual one. Her Technocrat philosophy was based on her Third Positon ideology so was manipulated to fit her position. She believed that in the future, machines would cater for humanity, giving humanity time to be obedient to an authority. Anyone who disagrees with authority, would be schooled to learn the errors of their ways. And if that didn't work, killed.

But, to clarify, that was only her (Rei's) position. I do not, nor do I promote, that Technocracy is or has anything to do with fascism.

[Oxymandias]

@B0ycey

That's fine and I apologize for putting you on the spot there. However you should note that Technocracy is characterized as an economic system for a post-scarcity socio-economic environment. It has very little to do with automation other than that it is compatible with it. A Basic Income activist may believe that Basic Income is necessary for the upcoming automation of major industries but that does not mean that the Basic Income activist is actually a Technocrat.

[Victoribus Spolia]

We could've double-teamed her.

Pervert.

Please don't use the word technocrat. Actually Technocracy is very different from what mainstream thought considers "technocracy".

I doubt Rei is mainstream in her usage....I had noticed in my debate with her that her "future world" seemed to lack scarcity, but then when pressed she denied that it did. There was a lot of weird inconsistencies in her thought as far as I could see.

Is this a sort of class collaboration kind of thing?

Yes, Corporatism.

In what sense is it authoritarian? I thought it favored free-markets? Isn't it hard to manage free markets and authoritarian control at the same time? Look at China which, despite being authoritarian, isn't able to crack down on offenders to
it's authoritarian rule because of it's relaxation on markets.

Its mainly authoritarian in extension of its hierarchical principles, that the leader should be Caesarian dictator-type. One who rules based on his "fitness" to rule. This is how Mussolini and Hitler were viewed intra-partisan. Some of this extends from the European impulse to recover the monarchical principle following World War I.

Also, third positioners don't believe in entirely free-markets, but a mixed economy rooted in a "soft" version of central planning. Protecting certain industries, banning others, manipulating the currency, imposing strict tariffs, requiring certain hiring practices, etc.

National Socialist economic policies are great examples of Third Position methods, whether it was the way they bypassed the international gold standard and still stabilized their currency, their marriage and childbearing policy which exploded industry, etc. All of these are quintessential third-position type things.

I. The Marriage Policy:

eliminated male unemployment by removing all women from paid positions, then offered a government marriage loan for women which would pay for small home, appliances, etc., that would be then forgiven by having a certain # of children (to promote marriage and increased birth rate), the loan could only be used to buy German made products, appliances, etc.

II. Foreign Trade

instead of trading in U.S. dollars, they greatly restricted imports, determined their own product value based on labor-investment in the products and directly traded based on agreed upon fairness of transaction (direct bartering, basically) with each partner.

These examples are Third-Position type actions.

What do you mean by this.

A rejection of both the Marxist idea of a naturalistic materialism and atheism and the liberal-capitalist indifference to such matters as religion and spiritually (allow such to be based on individual preference in a open market).

Rather, Third positionists are unified in advocating for a unified spiritual mythology surrounding the nation and its origins and destiny. This could imply a state church (like Nazi Germany's Reich church project) or a new religious mythology surrounding the people. Either way, atheism is absolutely repudiated and abhorred, as well as sectarianism in matters pertaining to religion. a common and unified spiritual state of the people is acknowledge by third positionists as important for their identity and for reinforcing the "legitimacy" of the Ruler.

* What even is this?

This ties to the point on social engineering, the belief that the collective, the people, can be improved towards higher and higher states of strength, purity, brilliance, etc.

It isn't different, it's just a different name for the same thing.

Agreed.

[One Degree]

An individual who has views in complete agreement with textbook descriptions has no view. They are automatons. Rei certainly did not.

[SolarCross]

An individual who has views in complete agreement with textbook descriptions has no view. They are automatons. Rei certainly did not.

Yeah she was pretty eccentric, but a lively debater and a fairly respectable one in terms of tactics. I don't recall her ever resorting to the cheap tricks of creatures like POD for example.

[Oxymandias]

@Victoribus Spolia

Thank you for the information. It's been a pleasure talking to you.

[Albert]

First Position: Liberalism
Second Position: Communism
Third Position: Fascism

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF40uGRVCl4

Rei may be speaking in this YouTube video, which is about Jeremy Corbyn's plan to buy 8,000 homes for 8,000 homeless people. I have never met her in person but she sounds like a middle-aged British woman who has a lot to complain about British society. Her profile signature used to promote Third Positionism.

Omg that is Rei, she sounds like such a nerd.

[SolarCross]

The specific Technocracy ideology of Veblen, Scott and others doesn't have an obvious common lineage with Fascism or third positionism but the intended end result is pretty comparable, it's basically full bore totalitarianism more so even than fascism actually. The sales pitch differs though, Technocracy was developed for being sold to Americans of the early 20th century, people who were enamoured of technological modernity, inventions, gadgets and whatnot but who were close to completely immune to marxian brutalist central planning or fascistic national purity mysticism. It never took off though as I suppose even its techno-glamour could not disguise the sulphurous stench of totalitarianism for the freedom loving american.

[Victoribus Spolia]

as I suppose even its techno-glamour could not disguise the sulphurous stench of totalitarianism for the freedom loving american.

1932 Technocrat: Hello good Sir, would like to hear about our glorious future?

1932 American: Get off my lawn or i'll shoot.

[Oxymandias]

@SolarCross

That's nothing like Technocracy at all. it seems to me that you are conflating modern perceptions of Technocracy with what Technocracy actually is. If Technocracy is actually put into place, you would have more freedom than you could possibly have, not a lack of freedom. The entire reason why Technocracy was created in the first place was to facilitate this kind of freedom. Furthermore it was extremely popular in America during the 1920s and 30s, it was only due to internal disagreements along with the US government's conscious effort to stamp out the movement that it fell flat in the first place.

Read these articles to have a better understanding of what Technocracy actually is:

http://www.technocracy.ca/tiki-index.php?page=Begin
http://www.technocracy.ca/tiki-index.ph ... believe+it
http://www.technocracy.ca/tiki-index.ph ... or+society
http://www.technocracy.ca/tiki-index.php?page=IB29
http://www.technocracy.ca/tiki-index.ph ... urbanates2

[SolarCross]

@Oxymandias
I have read the sales pitch before why would I read it again?

How to sell totalitarianism to Americans? Tell them your special version of totalitarianism = freedom + gadgets. It's false advertising though in the end.

[Oxymandias]

@SolarCross

You have not read anything given how you assume that Technocracy is "totalitarian" despite every piece of legitimate information about it saying the contrary so I strongly suggest you actually read up on it.

Technocracy is an economic system. They didn't spread word of it by saying "Wow! Flying cars! Robots! Skyscrapers! Yay!", they had an entire "study guide" which explains the economics of a system and distributed it to people. Technocracy never promised people liberation through technology, they promised a tool which can be applied in post-scarcity circumstances which is what America was dealing with during the Great Depression. Just because it has "Techno" in the name and so you childishly assume that it automatically is equivalent to "futuristic technology" doesn't mean you're right about exactly what it is. Simply put SolarCross, you're ignorant of Technocracy and seriously reading about the concept will do wonders to fixing that.

[SolarCross]

@SolarCross

You have not read anything given how you assume that Technocracy is "totalitarian" despite every piece of legitimate information about it saying the contrary so I strongly suggest you actually read up on it.

Technocracy is an economic system. They didn't spread word of it by saying "Wow! Flying cars! Robots! Skyscrapers! Yay!", they had an entire "study guide" which explains the economics of a system and distributed it to people. Technocracy never promised people liberation through technology, they promised a tool which can be applied in post-scarcity circumstances which is what America was dealing with during the Great Depression. Just because it has "Techno" in the name and so you childishly assume that it automatically is equivalent to "futuristic technology" doesn't mean you're right about exactly what it is. Simply put SolarCross, you're ignorant of Technocracy and seriously reading about the concept will do wonders to fixing that.

You know there is new version of Technocracy where AI supercomputers are proposed to control everything? Somehow it was even less popular than the old Technocracy. I can't remember what they called it, it has been a few years now since I heard about it.

[One Degree]

Since most experts (technocrats) are frauds and know in their hearts they don’t really understand their own field, this seems a very risky ideology.
If this system actually worked then the head of every department would be the most knowledgeable person. We know this is not what happens. You would just end up with an Oligarchy granting themselves fake credentials.

[Oxymandias]

@SolarCross

That is entirely irrelevant both to my post and our current discussion. There is no such thing as a "new Technocracy". Technocracy is a tool, not a form of government or ideology. Furthermore, Technocracy as a movement was very popular in America. This trite sort of rambling makes you SolarCross much worse to debate with than POD given that you don't even read the person's effing post.

@One Degree

A technocrat is someone who advocates for Technocracy, they aren't experts. Technocracy is an economic system in the event of post-scarcity and therefore is primarily a system to efficiently distribute the abundance of resources gained from such post-scarcity to anyone who needs them. Technocracy has a clear, specific method necessary to distribute those resources in the most efficient manner possible. Due to this, the only experts required are technical experts who are capable of running the machine that is the economic system and providing everyone else with with what is essentially unlimited resources.

[SolarCross]

That is entirely irrelevant both to my post and our current discussion. There is no such thing as a "new Technocracy". Technocracy is a tool, not a form of government or ideology. Furthermore, Technocracy as a movement was very popular in America. This trite sort of rambling makes you SolarCross much worse to debate with than POD given that you don't even read the person's effing post.

There is, or was, but it didn't amount to anything, if I could remember the brand name it went under I could perhaps find something on the internet about it. The idea was that AI computers would takeover all the economy and decide who gets what rations in a way that is "fair". AI would replace the technocrats to put it simply.

It is an ideology and as such a tool for manipulating people. It is full of lies too.

[Oxymandias]

@SolarCross

Like I said, it is irrelevant.

Why don't you actually give a good argument and respond to my previous ones instead of going on irrelevant childish tangents with the clear motivation to derail the discussion at hand? Why don't you tell me exactly what Technocracy is "lying" about? Why are so unwilling to admit that you know 0 things about Technocracy and why are you so unwilling to cure yourself of such ignorance.

[Saeko]

Who even is Rei?

Rei is the rising spring sun after a cold winter night.

[Rancid]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BF40uGRVCl4

Rei may be speaking in this YouTube video, which is about Jeremy Corbyn's plan to buy 8,000 homes for 8,000 homeless people. I have never met her in person but she sounds like a middle-aged British woman who has a lot to complain about British society. Her profile signature used to promote Third Positionism.

I'm just gonna say it.

Rei sounds black to me. Has anyone actually seen her?

I can't get the picture of a black British women out of my head when I hear that voice.

[Victoribus Spolia]

Rei is the rising spring sun after a cold winter night.