Log in

View Full Version : technocrat?



AGITprop
3rd December 2007, 18:04
what is a technocrat?
i read this term being used alot ad i feel left out of the loop?
can i have a quick explanation as to what it entails.

Q
3rd December 2007, 18:28
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 06:03 pm
what is a technocrat?
i read this term being used alot ad i feel left out of the loop?
can i have a quick explanation as to what it entails.
In short: the use of technology to create a state of superabundance.

AGITprop
3rd December 2007, 19:02
Originally posted by Q-collective+December 03, 2007 06:27 pm--> (Q-collective @ December 03, 2007 06:27 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 06:03 pm
what is a technocrat?
i read this term being used alot ad i feel left out of the loop?
can i have a quick explanation as to what it entails.
In short: the use of technology to create a state of superabundance. [/b]
okay..now...how exactly do they propose to do this

Psy
3rd December 2007, 19:04
Originally posted by Ender+December 03, 2007 07:01 pm--> (Ender @ December 03, 2007 07:01 pm)
Originally posted by Q-[email protected] 03, 2007 06:27 pm

[email protected] 03, 2007 06:03 pm
what is a technocrat?
i read this term being used alot ad i feel left out of the loop?
can i have a quick explanation as to what it entails.
In short: the use of technology to create a state of superabundance.
okay..now...how exactly do they propose to do this [/b]
By putting engineers in charge of society, their beef with capitalists is they are unqualified as they are not engineers, that said they don't want the average worker in charge either as they feel it is them the engineers that are destined to lead humanity.

AGITprop
3rd December 2007, 19:20
technocrats=douche

Psy
3rd December 2007, 21:33
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 07:19 pm
technocrats=douche
No just full of themselves, they don't see the masses as smart as them and that it is only logical for society to be run by a class of really smart people that have been educated in the sciences, they believe democracy is illogical when it comes to technical issues as the point is to make the right decisions (which would be made based on science). Some technocrats even think humanity should build a hyper intelligent super computer and make it the boss of the world.

AGITprop
3rd December 2007, 22:14
Originally posted by Psy+December 03, 2007 09:32 pm--> (Psy @ December 03, 2007 09:32 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 07:19 pm
technocrats=douche
No just full of themselves, they don't see the masses as smart as them and that it is only logical for society to be run by a class of really smart people that have been educated in the sciences, they believe democracy is illogical when it comes to technical issues as the point is to make the right decisions (which would be made based on science). Some technocrats even think humanity should build a hyper intelligent super computer and make it the boss of the world. [/b]
are there any technocrats that advocate use of eugenics?

Cryotank Screams
3rd December 2007, 22:27
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 03:01 pm
okay..now...how exactly do they propose to do this
By using technology? As of right now, we probably have enough technological advances to create abundance but do to the 'price system' we create artificial scarcity and according to Technocracy the 'price system' depends upon artificial scarcity and is obsolete and said 'price system' should be eliminated, so thus as Q-collective said through technology and a new system we could create superabundance. All the posts other than yours and Q-collective's are bullshit.

Cryotank Screams
3rd December 2007, 22:28
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 06:13 pm
are there any technocrats that advocate use of eugenics?
(Fuck) no.

AGITprop
3rd December 2007, 22:40
Originally posted by Cryotank Screams+December 03, 2007 10:27 pm--> (Cryotank Screams @ December 03, 2007 10:27 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 06:13 pm
are there any technocrats that advocate use of eugenics?
(Fuck) no. [/b]
r u french? or quebecois?

Cryotank Screams
3rd December 2007, 22:42
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 06:39 pm
r u french? or quebecois?
Non. But I can read a little French here and there.

Psy
3rd December 2007, 23:29
Originally posted by Cryotank [email protected] 03, 2007 10:26 pm
By using technology? As of right now, we probably have enough technological advances to create abundance but do to the 'price system' we create artificial scarcity and according to Technocracy the 'price system' depends upon artificial scarcity and is obsolete and said 'price system' should be eliminated, so thus as Q-collective said through technology and a new system we could create superabundance. All the posts other than yours and Q-collective's are bullshit.
From the Technocracy FAQ v1.3 (http://www.technocracy.ca/simp/Technocracy_FAQ_1.x.htm#6.61)


Although elements of both socialist and democratic systems might be found in Technocracy's design, this should not be taken as Technocracy being similar to either. While it is both easy and common to want to group Technocracy together with more familiar political and economic systems, this would be a mistake. The simple reason for this is because Technocracy is far too different from any other social system ever devised.

It cannot be grouped with other political systems because Technocracy does not involve politics. Technocracy is about the scientific control of technology, not a philosophical method of controlling people. Likewise, Technocracy cannot be grouped with other economic systems because Technocracy relies on the existence of an established, technological abundance, whereas all other systems, i.e. "Price Systems", all rely on the existence of a natural state of scarcity. Therefore, we find that Technocracy is not, and cannot be easily compared to, either a socialist or democratic system.

Incidentally, if one were to pick these systems apart for their good and bad points, it would be likely that one would find the best elements of these other systems existing in a Technocratic society, with all the problems of those same systems being absent. This, however, is another discussion

Basically Technocracy decides to skip around class (as class is political), Marx also though it would be best for Communism to start in the heart of capitalism where it has the massive productive forces built by capitalism. As for scientific control of technology, while science can tell you cause and effect science itself can't control anything.



There would be no need of Labor Unions. Since there would be no money being paid out for salaries, there would be no use for bargaining for better wages. There could probably be some kind of grievance committees within each industry to bring major or minor disputes before some judicial persons knowledgeable about the handling of such controversies, without a raucous discord disrupting the work of other employees or other public services.

Here again skipping around the class issue, that just because salaries are gone there would be no class conflict, also unions would allow workers from different workplaces to get together but again that would be something one would find in workers state which technocracy doesn't necessarily subscribe to.

Lynx
4th December 2007, 05:32
No class, no politics. The objective is material equality and the technological means to maintain and improve efficiency and abundance. The beneficiaries are people and the environment.

Dimentio
4th December 2007, 12:06
Originally posted by Psy+December 03, 2007 09:32 pm--> (Psy @ December 03, 2007 09:32 pm)
[email protected] 03, 2007 07:19 pm
technocrats=douche
No just full of themselves, they don't see the masses as smart as them and that it is only logical for society to be run by a class of really smart people that have been educated in the sciences, they believe democracy is illogical when it comes to technical issues as the point is to make the right decisions (which would be made based on science). Some technocrats even think humanity should build a hyper intelligent super computer and make it the boss of the world. [/b]
Hm hrm...

There is not really a difference between technocracy and socialism. Technocracy means that those who are educated and qualified in one area decides implementations and administration of their own area. That could be engineers yes, but also industrial process workers (robot programmers for example), nurses, and electricians - yes really any group of skilled personnel.

If you want to see what technocracy is, look here: http://en.technocracynet.eu

And no, we do not advocate eugenics as we do not advocate control over the human being but over technology.

Jazzratt
4th December 2007, 12:33
Originally posted by [email protected] 03, 2007 06:03 pm
what is a technocrat?
Me. And now you have to fight me :lol:

I always understood technocracy as a "nuts and bolts" approach to a post-capitalist society - one with an overall plan for what to do once we've destroyed capitalism. Although I think most of the other technocrats can explain this better than me.

Cult of Reason
4th December 2007, 15:53
Technocracy involves using advanced technology (which we already have) and energy accounting in order to have a system of production and distribution that is as efficient as possible, hence allowing 'the highest possible standard of living for the longest possible time'. Ideally, with sufficient recycling, the use of non-renewable materials, such as iron etc., would form a nearly close loop, with the only thing 'consumed' and 'lost' being the energy (the state of which in fact just degrades into useless heat), which we will be getting from the Sun for a few more billion years.

AGITprop
4th December 2007, 17:22
i believe now understand. yea so technocracy doesnt sound half bad, i dont think it is elitist in anway. it just pushes for those who can to create and run and maintain a system which would allow us maximum standards of living that benefit all and help protect the environment.

Dimentio
4th December 2007, 17:27
If you want to know more about modern technocracy, I could advocate that you look into N.E.T;s website at http://en.technocracynet.eu

AGITprop
4th December 2007, 17:27
Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 05:26 pm
If you want to know more about modern technocracy, I could advocate that you look into N.E.T;s website at http://en.technocracynet.eu
thanx alot

Psy
4th December 2007, 19:46
Originally posted by [email protected] 04, 2007 12:05 pm
There is not really a difference between technocracy and socialism. Technocracy means that those who are educated and qualified in one area decides implementations and administration of their own area. That could be engineers yes, but also industrial process workers (robot programmers for example), nurses, and electricians - yes really any group of skilled personnel.
Take a factory, workers do have a understanding of the production process even though they don't as much of a understanding as engineers. If we look at factory occupations like those in Buenos Aires it was the workers that decided (with engineers being equal to worker when it came to decisions) and the engineers used their skills to carry out the wishes of the collective.

Dr Mindbender
4th December 2007, 19:50
its isnt just missapropriation of resources and technology thats the problem, its also a missapropriation of eduation. The workers arent 'stupid' per se, its just that they dont have equal opportunities to their middle and upper class peers to obtain the training for skilled employment.

Dr Mindbender
4th December 2007, 19:55
..also, when people think of 'technocracy' they have a tendency to think of the scientists and engineers. While they are obviously integral, its important to remember that the writers, musicians, actors, artists and philosophers will play a vital and fundamental part to the morale and cultural preservation of proletarian controlled society. The 2 camps of academia will be reliant upon each other.

Dimentio
4th December 2007, 21:05
Originally posted by Psy+December 04, 2007 07:45 pm--> (Psy @ December 04, 2007 07:45 pm)
[email protected] 04, 2007 12:05 pm
There is not really a difference between technocracy and socialism. Technocracy means that those who are educated and qualified in one area decides implementations and administration of their own area. That could be engineers yes, but also industrial process workers (robot programmers for example), nurses, and electricians - yes really any group of skilled personnel.
Take a factory, workers do have a understanding of the production process even though they don't as much of a understanding as engineers. If we look at factory occupations like those in Buenos Aires it was the workers that decided (with engineers being equal to worker when it came to decisions) and the engineers used their skills to carry out the wishes of the collective. [/b]
Yes, exactly. That is similar to the way a technate would work.