Why is Technocracy desirable? - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

The solving of mankind’s problems and abolition of government via technological solutions alone.

Moderator: Kolzene

Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14449957
Technocracy is not utopian, because it does not claim to solve all problems. There will still be crime, there will still be disease, there will still be dissension, and fighting, and accidents, and disagreements, and heartbreak, and people hating each other, and possibly even war. The point is that there will just be less of that stuff, and more of what most people consider the good stuff. I know it may seem "fanciful" to many, because the claims are so big, but that does not make it utopian, or perfect.
You're right, this may make it a dystopia. Why is Technocracy desirable? Because you claim it to be desirable? This totalitarian technocratic regime- followed by technophiles, controlled by a group of technical elite (private corporations most likely) backed by the centralised legal system of government, is it free? I'd like to know, given you, Kolzene, tend to be a mouthpiece for the party. ;)

So please, straight from the horse's mouth, do tell, how a society which is free can automate systems, group some voluntary collective, and offer everything which is desired, without complete control over its populace and culture. You do realize, the technical elite who erect such a whimsical government will have to come from a post capitalist market, possibly some socialist one (if Marx is correct). Whereas to say, all their wealth and power be derived from everything Technocracy wishes to abolish. So, hypothetically, the technocratic elite will be products of capital greed, and any post capital system or transition toward socialism will be under their guide. Who will control the machine, Kolzene? I am not going to give my government over to robots, especially in the name of humanity, for I will lose my humanity.

You have no real method of implementation. You use this forum as a think tank, where you can mentally masturbate considering Technocracy. Then, to top it off, you claim your system of thought to be free of hyper-unrealistic goals and definitively not utopian. Claiming dissents to be mere trolls or ignorant people who need to go read more elsewhere, so they too can see the light. Man, are you brainwashed by this idea, this technocracy? I have to ask, because you remind me of the fascists and the communists, both tend to be totalitarian bullies trying to indoctrinate the hapless.

In short, I do not find your Technocracy desirable. Even if it is possible, I do not find it desirable. So, if this thread is to promote the desirability of Technocracy then I consider it a poor outlet for critical discussion. Ergo one failed thread. This, of course, is my opinion here in this thread on an internet forum. Nothing more.


Here is one quote from someone with the power to help implement Technocracy.

"The technotronic era involves the gradual appearance of a more controlled society. Such a society would be dominated by an elite, unrestrained by traditional values. Soon it will be possible to assert almost continuous surveillance over every citizen and maintain up-to-date complete files containing even the most personal information about the citizen. These files will be subject to instantaneous retrieval by the authorities." 1970, Zbigniew Brzezinski

^ The kind of people who will run this Technocracy, surely.




Here is how this thread started (only for those who believe in Technocracy)
High standard of living for every citizen
Free, top-quality health care whenever you need it
Free, top-quality education whenever you want it
Wide range of high quality products for consumption
No low-quality strategies normally used to increase profits, like planned obsolescence
Products automatically delivered directly into your home using Utilities Distribution Planning
Wide range of foods available, either as ingredients or cooked meals, delivered into your home or to public eating areas (equivalent of restaurants)
Clean, comfortable homes for everyone, that are fireproof, sound proof, and pest proof
All amenities within walking distance for normally abled people, and for others, automatic transportation in the form of elevators, moving sidewalks, etc.
Economic security because income guaranteed as right of citizenship
Income more than you can consume, so no worries about budgeting or running out
Free transportation anywhere on in the Technate, that is fast and comfortable
Nearly unlimited range of recreation opportunities (travel, parks, hobbies, common interest groups, etc.)
All media consumption free with no worries of copyright infringement
Opportunities for career limited only by your innate abilities
No time wasted on legal entanglements and contracts, property management, taxes, finances, etc.
Greater amount of free time than found for most people today, to spend on hobbies, entertainment, self-improvement, life-goals, travel, and relationships
No need for bargain hunting, coupon clipping, or comparison shopping
No loyalty or rewards cards
No credit cards, debit cards, cheques, or any other banking needed
No need to be jealous of another's material possessions
No need to define yourself by your possessions
No need for hoarding or stocking up
Food made as healthy as possible (no harmful pesticides, growth hormones, etc.)
No traffic jams, parking problems, or other automobile hassles
A lot of sources of modern-day stress eliminated (as above)

Benefits for society:

No pollution
No poverty, homelessness, or people lacking education or food
95% reduction in crime compared to today
No political fighting or other troubles in administration
No economic fluctuations like inflation, recessions, or depression
No economic need to go to war (war for oil, other resources, etc.)
No economic meddling in other country's affairs (IMF, WTO, etc.)
Best defence capabilities on the planet
No censorship, discrimination (racial, sexual, or otherwise), or other restrictions on human rights
Standardization means no problems with competing and closed standards or formats (computers, media, electronics, etc.)
No annoying and intrusive advertising everywhere
No corporate or political influence of public opinion
No financial or political interferences in news reporting
Everything possible is recyclable and environmentally friendly
Sustainable economy


Now we backtrack with
Technocracy is not utopian, because it does not claim to solve all problems. There will still be crime, there will still be disease, there will still be dissension, and fighting, and accidents, and disagreements, and heartbreak, and people hating each other, and possibly even war. The point is that there will just be less of that stuff, and more of what most people consider the good stuff. I know it may seem "fanciful" to many, because the claims are so big, but that does not make it utopian, or perfect.


Kolzene should rephrase the initial print and it should look like this
Average standard of living for every citizen
Free, average health care whenever you need it
Free, average education whenever you want it
Decent range of average quality products for consumption
Some low-quality strategies normally used to increase profits, like planned obsolescence
Products automatically delivered directly into your home using Utilities Distribution Planning
Wide range of foods available, either as ingredients or cooked meals, delivered into your home or to public eating areas (equivalent of restaurants)
Clean, comfortable homes for everyone, that are fireproof, sound proof, pest proof, and imagination proof
All amenities within walking distance for normally abled people, and for others, automatic transportation in the form of elevators, moving sidewalks, etc.
Economic security because the state owns you
Income more than you can consume, so no worries about budgeting or running out
Some free transportation anywhere on in the Technate, that is fast and comfortable
Nearly unlimited range of recreation opportunities (travel, parks, hobbies, common interest groups, etc.)
All media consumption free with no worries of copyright infringement, because it is all propaganda
Opportunities for career limited only by your innate abilities, we think
Some time wasted on legal entanglements and contracts, property management, taxes, finances, etc.
Greater amount of free time than found for most people today, to spend on hobbies, entertainment, self-improvement, life-goals, travel, and relationships
Some need for bargain hunting, coupon clipping, or comparison shopping
Some loyalty or rewards cards
No credit cards, debit cards, cheques, or any other banking needed, we own you
No need to be jealous of another's material possessions, we brainwashed you
No need to define yourself by your possessions, we brainwashed you
Some need for hoarding or stocking up
Food made as healthy as possible (no harmful pesticides, growth hormones, etc.)
Some traffic jams, parking problems, or other automobile hassles
Some sources of modern-day stress eliminated (as above)

Benefits for society:

Some pollution
Some poverty, homelessness, or people lacking education or food
Some reduction in crime compared to today
Some political fighting or other troubles in administration
Some economic fluctuations like inflation, recessions, or depression
Some economic need to go to war (war for oil, other resources, etc.)
Some economic meddling in other country's affairs (IMF, WTO, etc.)
Best defence capabilities on the planet
Some censorship, discrimination (racial, sexual, or otherwise), or other restrictions on human rights
Standardization means no problems with competing and closed standards or formats (computers, media, electronics, etc.)
Some annoying and intrusive advertising everywhere
Some corporate or political influence of public opinion
Some financial or political interferences in news reporting
Somethings are recyclable and environmentally friendly
Kinda Sustainable economy


After, one may wonder, what is the point of this thread, beyond promoting fantastic utopian rhetoric?
#14820460
quetzalcoatl wrote:To elaborate slightly, an outline of aims is not enough (although it may be a starting point). A system of political organization must be specified, and a semi-plausible route to achieving it.


What, do you think I don't know this? Do you think that I just made up this list one day and that's all there is to it? Do you think that there are not reams of books and essays and articles written on the topic, covering many different subjects and aspects (not to mention hundreds of posts in this very forum)? Because otherwise why would you be telling me this? It sounds a bit insulting.


quetzalcoatl wrote:The plan may not be fantastical in nature - it must comport with what we know of human tendencies in social organization.


What seems fantastical to some, or even many, may still be very much real and valid. Flying seemed fantastical to most people, so did space travel, or going to the moon. How about being able to talk to people at a distance? Just because you have not seen all the evidence that has led to these conclusions does not mean that it is not there. I mean really, you are acting like this thread is the first thing ever written on the topic. If something seems fantastical to you, then ask how it may not be so. Stating this "decree" to me is basically assuming that no such explanation could possibly exist. I mean, what do you expect me to say in response to this: "Aw, it can't be fantastical? Darn. I was so hoping it could. Cry "


quetzalcoatl wrote:All bureaucracies are without exception subservient to a political system; it is sheer fantasy to assert that they can be purely instrumental in nature.


That you have seen so far. Just because something has never existed does not mean that it cannot exist. I refer you again to the aforementioned examples of technology.

quetzalcoatl wrote:All tools are employed for a purpose


Of course, and Technocracy has a very clearly stated purpose, which I have mentioned many times. This has nothing whatsoever to do with employing politics as a tool to achieve that purpose.


quetzalcoatl wrote:every human purpose is embedded in a network of political relations.


Not so. Very many projects get done without the use of politics as a tool to achieve it. Usually this is in the technology sector. Yes, something political probably gave them their goal in the first place, but that doesn't mean that they use politics to achieve their goal. Yes, informal politics may occur between individuals that gets in the way, but this results in inferior and insufficient results. Let me give you a very simple example, that of flying a 747 full of passengers from one city to another. There is a purpose for you, but what politics are involved in getting that plane off the ground, into the air, flown to its destination in the most efficient way possible, and then landing safely at its destination? None, it's pure science all the way. Politics may interfere by not allowing them to fly through some kind of "airspace", but that results in a much less efficient flight path, taking up more time and fuel. The pilot and co-pilot may get into a disagreement about one's alleged flirting with the other's spouse, but if that gets in the way of their mission, the flight will be in danger, of at least not getting there on time, possibly physical danger (if they are really not paying attention). And yes, the choice of destination can be a purely subjective one sure, but that's the goal, it can be, just like Technocracy's goal is. That still doesn't mean that politics is used to get those passengers there. It works the same way in Technocracy as well. I know that right now you can't imagine how that is possibly so, but that could just be because you don't have enough information, and if that's the case, you should be looking for it, or at least asking for it, not declaring that it doesn't exist, because you don't know.

I didn't start this post by saying that here's the truth and that's all there is to it, just believe me gosh-darn-it!! Why are you acting like I did? Yes, I made a mistake by asking essentially "Are desirable things desirable?" But I did not preclude the possibility of ever talking about how they are possible. At most I just said that talking about that was not on topic for this thread, feel free to talk about it elsewhere. I think that that strongly suggests that there is indeed something to talk about.
#14450082
A lot of things may, in principle, be desirable. That doesn't necessarily mean they are achievable - and, if achievable, worthwhile after considering the costs.

In the future, please submit to Quetz's Decree:

A political philosophy shall be considered void unless it is actionable.


To elaborate slightly, an outline of aims is not enough (although it may be a starting point). A system of political organization must be specified, and a semi-plausible route to achieving it. The plan may not be fantastical in nature - it must comport with what we know of human tendencies in social organization. All bureaucracies are without exception subservient to a political system; it is sheer fantasy to assert that they can be purely instrumental in nature. All tools are employed for a purpose - and every human purpose is embedded in a network of political relations.
#14450806
I want to ask people if this is the kind of society they would like to live in, again, assuming for the moment that it is indeed possible.


The answer is a resounding yes...

Of all the governing systems I would much rather live in a technocratic state...
#14820462
...also achievements by exceptional individuals, in science, art, entertainment, technology, athletics, diplomacy, exploration, international relations, and foreign aid. And as I said, there would still be crime, so that could be reported on as well. And then of course there would be international news, plenty of that.
#14460136
Saeko wrote:No financial or political interferences in news reporting


What exactly would there even be to report in this utopia?

Headline:

Experts Say Everything Still Absolutely Perfect, 6983 Days In a Row.

Local Man Responds: "Hooray."[/quote]

First of all, utopia is not a synonym of technocracy. A working technocracy is not a perfect society, which an utopia is. A perfect society is impossible.

What would be news items to report on in a Technocracy? Scientific discoveries, Natural disasters, Public Events, Accidents, etc. Pretty much the same as now..
#14572131
Kolzene wrote:Setting aside for the moment whether or not Technocracy is even possible (we can talk about that in another thread(s)), given what Technocracy proposes is possible, which I will outline in this post, I want to ask people if this is the kind of society they would like to live in, again, assuming for the moment that it is indeed possible. My theory is that Technocracy can appeal to anyone, whatever their political orientation, that it is just not obvious to many that this is so.

So what makes Technocracy desirable?

Why on Earth should anyone expect that your laundry of list of boons would follow from a technocratic society?

Having the technological power to achieve some end is not the same as being inclined or interested in achieving that end. Presumably the technocrats are just experts in technology -- what guarantees that their list of values and interests is the same as yours, and would result in the same ream of boons?

It seems you assume that anyone who can program a computer or design a tractor has the same Vision of Humanity. I'm strongly inclined to doubt whether this is the case.
#14572142
Why on Earth should anyone expect that your laundry of list of boons would follow from a technocratic society?

Having the technological power to achieve some end is not the same as being inclined or interested in achieving that end. Presumably the technocrats are just experts in technology -- what guarantees that their list of values and interests is the same as yours, and would result in the same ream of boons?

It seems you assume that anyone who can program a computer or design a tractor has the same Vision of Humanity. I'm strongly inclined to doubt whether this is the case.

Precisely. Technology is a tool rather than bearing any sort of political or social or even spiritual vision in and of itself. In the Middle East, for example, Islamists quite cheerfully use the most advanced technology to implement a political and social vision of humanity which dates back to the 7th century AD - the Muslim Caliphate. And it's not impossible to imagine human civilisation descending into some kind of "techno-barbarism" - scattered bands of tribes or pirates who use high technology weaponry and communications but who otherwise behave more or less like roving bands of Vikings in the European Dark Ages. After all, the Viking longships were the most sophisticated ships which had ever been built up to that point in human history. It was this sort of sophisticated maritime technology which made the Vikings so dangerous.
#14820465
No guys, that's not what I was talking about at all. What I was talking about resulted in a failed discussion and I've already apologized for it. Topic's done. If you want to talk about the feasibility of technocracy you can do it in a new thread.
#14820467
It may "sound" like a huge government, but it is not. Technocracy does not use political government at all, so it is actually more "free" than any system today. No, what "gives" all this is the economy, because Technocracy is an economic system, not a political system.
#14591699
Sounds like an incredibly huge government to me. When a government is this big that it can give you everything, then it can take away anyway it wants. In this kind of a system, you are only as free as the leash you're on.

I really don't understand why some people hate liberty so much.
#14627026
Kolzene wrote:It may "sound" like a huge government, but it is not. Technocracy does not use political government at all, so it is actually more "free" than any system today. No, what "gives" all this is the economy, because Technocracy is an economic system, not a political system.
Behind the etymology used here, one can argue that Capitalism is an economic system not a political system but it certainly influences politics. Kolzene's definition of technocracy is not feasible unless you establish one centralized authoritarian government. Do not listen to his propaganda. History shows that the transitional sleight of mind he is using does not change our physical reality. In order to implement Technocracy, all personal & private information would have to be streamlined/given (through government procedure, force, or willful ignorance) to a centralized intelligence, be it a group of technicians or bureaucrats, and then automated by various technologies. Once fully realized this economic system would govern human affairs without public representation. The ongoing maintenance would have to be conducted by a select group of technologists who understand/design the economy, therefore these technologists would indirectly govern the people living in a technocratic economic system. If however, some kind of enlightened education system emerged alongside Technocracy, the people could be technicians & share responsibilities, equally preserving their Technocracy. I highly doubt that, without dramatic sterilization of natural human behaviors, this economic system would succeed in the future. By all means, claim relationship to this tyrannical form of wishful thinking, but don't lie to the people.

Perhaps the current methodology be wasteful & barbaric, perhaps we have less of a voice now than we would have in the Technocracy... Yet I see little light because proponents of Technocracy are using the same word games we've seen used by prior totalitarian hiccups. Just tell the people you want to control their ideas wants & needs, just tell the people they have to accept intelligently designed control schemes for a better future, but don't sit here & tell them Technocracy isn't a from of government. Best of luck to you Kolzene.
#14651315
I would imagine that technocracy is inevitable because nature seems to be an entropy machine and it is building itself to larger scales to distribute energy more efficiently, but I think the kind of technocracy I imagine and the kind you imagine would be very different
#14651318
Ummon wrote:I would imagine that technocracy is inevitable because nature seems to be an entropy machine and it is building itself to larger scales to distribute energy more efficiently, but I think the kind of technocracy I imagine and the kind you imagine would be very different


Governmental administration is not divorceable from politics, either in principle or practice. It is best to leave the politics in full view where it can be addressed by all.
#14651657
I'm not sure what you're referring to. What I am speaking of is synthetic biology making the economy uncontrollable and non-centralized as we custom manufacture species to microniches in our environment, the intellectual property problem most information dependent industries face will expand to the realm of tangible objects as you can manufacture objects/living creatures on demand, once we develop fusion humanity will likely begin to colonize the solar system leading to a wide variation in culture, thought, expression and an expansion of what we view as acceptable because if you don't like some government you can always move to the next comet or asteroid, people will begin tampering with their own dna and microbiomes adapting to extreme conditions that human physiology is not suited for, etc. I don't think it will be a controlled regulated thing where we set up a system by which everything runs smoothly and the excess production is spread among all equally because I don't think that reflects the way humans behave and if we did manage it over time it would likely lead to a caste like system sort of like an ant colony where certain humans are specialized for particular tasks and that sounds unappealing to me so I am sure at least 10% of humanity would be similarly inclined. That doesn't mean I don't think there will be nations in space or anything either, but you have to look at it like migration flow out of africa to all the continents beyond. In the same way humans will spread branch out and create new territories for themselves, some will settle in a location and others will keep moving. The difference is that we'll be able to use technology to adapt almost any environment or adapt ourselves to it and we will expand life into various sectors of the milky way like gas diffuses through a room.
Schizophrenia

AS probably has continued side effects from some s[…]

Election 2020

I predict that capitalists with a neo-imperialist[…]

That'll Just About Do It For Beto...

I doubt that this will have any impact. All the p[…]

There's ''productive'' in the sense of; ''got to […]