Technocracy and "competing against capitalism"

[Led Zeppelin]

It is terribly idealist

And creating a "technate" or a system to compete with capitalism within the context of capitalism, in order to eventually take it over, isn't?

[apathy maybe]

And creating a "technate" or a system to compete with capitalism within the context of capitalism, in order to eventually take it over, isn't?

And spamming a thread with irrelevances isn't trolling?

The ideas of technocracy are no more idealistic then the idea that you can create a vanguard, which upon sizing state power will eliminate all opposition and the proceed to eliminate all class distinctions, before giving up that power and joining the rest of society in the wonderful utopia.

The idea that a "technate" can compete with capitalism isn't any more absurd then the idea that the state will magically "whither away".

[Dimentio]

And creating a "technate" or a system to compete with capitalism within the context of capitalism, in order to eventually take it over, isn't?

No. It's not gonna be there to take over capitalism, just create the basis for an eventual transition of economic power. Besides, the proto-technate could always have lower marginal costs than capitalist businesses.

[Led Zeppelin]

No. It's not gonna be there to take over capitalism, just create the basis for an eventual transition of economic power.

Why would this be necessary if you already have the economic power which can be taken over in the form of capitalist means of production?


Besides, the proto-technate could always have lower marginal costs than capitalist businesses.

This may be so. There were also several "socialist-run" factories and places of production (there are still are some in Argentinia I believe) in Russia and other places, they can function well, sure, but it is impossible for them to compete with capitalism on a large scale, simply because capitalist businesses have, in general, more capital at their disposal.

Can you cite one example throughout history of any such businesses being able to outcompete a capitalist system of the same magnitude? And if no, could you explain exactly how this would be possible in the current world (so not in a future technocratic society)?

Having said that, I will split the thread about the discussion on Technocracy.

EDIT: As for apathy always, the only thing I have to say to you is that Paranoid Android fucking rules.

[DancingLarry]

Why would this be necessary if you already have the economic power which can be taken over in the form of capitalist means of production?



Can you cite one example throughout history of any such businesses being able to outcompete a capitalist system of the same magnitude?

The ones that succeed within the parameters of capitalism inevitably end up becoming capitalist corporate entities themselves. See: Amana.

[Dimentio]

Why would this be necessary if you already have the economic power which can be taken over in the form of capitalist means of production?



This may be so. There were also several "socialist-run" factories and places of production (there are still are some in Argentinia I believe) in Russia and other places, they can function well, sure, but it is impossible for them to compete with capitalism on a large scale, simply because capitalist businesses have, in general, more capital at their disposal.

Can you cite one example throughout history of any such businesses being able to outcompete a capitalist system of the same magnitude? And if no, could you explain exactly how this would be possible in the current world (so not in a future technocratic society)?

Having said that, I will split the thread about the discussion on Technocracy.

EDIT: As for apathy always, the only thing I have to say to you is that Paranoid Android fucking rules.

Because we still do not know how to manage resources in an efficient enough way, or how the users will respond to energy accounting. Moreover if successful, the experiments could strenthen working class determination. I could explain, but that will give away or secret. It has something to do with taxation and marginal benefits for workers.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

People in favor of technocracy/socialism competing against capitalism usually wish to limit, severely restrict, or even convert existing corporations (as well as the issuing of charters). At the basic level, if a majority of the work force at a corporation wants to socialize the company, I see it as their right. I suggested technocratic firms compete against petit-bourgeoisie establishments like sole proprietorships, partnerships, and maybe even limited corporations. Assuming not everyone is completely polarized into two classes, it would allow for 1.) socialism to justify the merit of transition to hardened skeptics and 2.) not radicalize the petit-bourgeoisie towards our sworn enemy (fascism).

[Dimentio]

People in favor of technocracy/socialism competing against capitalism usually wish to limit, severely restrict, or even convert existing corporations (as well as the issuing of charters). At the basic level, if a majority of the work force at a corporation wants to socialize the company, I see it as their right. I suggested technocratic firms compete against petit-bourgeoisie establishments like sole proprietorships, partnerships, and maybe even limited corporations. Assuming not everyone is completely polarized into two classes, it would allow for 1.) socialism to justify the merit of transition to hardened skeptics and 2.) not radicalize the petit-bourgeoisie towards our sworn enemy (fascism).



The goal should be to completely integrate the users into the frame of the prototech by issuing salaries in the form of energy certifikates, so all their consumption will be done through the proto-tech as the middle man.

Since the users have no income, they pay no taxes. Therefore, they would have a higher "real income" than workers in ordinary companies. In the same time, the Proto-tech should eventually strive to automatise so much as possible of its production, further cutting down costs.

[KC]

I could explain, but that will give away or secret.

So what's the secret?

[Schrödinger's Cat]

So what's the secret?

Benjamin Tucker was a hermaphrodite.

Oh, wait. Wrong thread.

[trivas7]

The ideas of technocracy are no more idealistic then the idea that you can create a vanguard, which upon sizing state power will eliminate all opposition and the proceed to eliminate all class distinctions, before giving up that power and joining the rest of society in the wonderful utopia.

I don't agree. There is a revolutionary program that has historically succeeded in social revolution. AFAIK, technates, like PARECONs, only exist on paper.

[Hyacinth]

I fail to see how it is possible to create a “prototechnate” within the context of capitalism. Setting aside for a moment the practical problem of having enough capital to actually undertake such a venture (why would anyone who did have enough such capital decide to do so?), isn’t a technocracy only capable of functioning when it has access to sufficient material resources, hence why such proposals are usually for a continent-wide (or world-wide) system.

Moreover, aren’t you in effect just establishing another corporation that will compete within the context of capitalism? After all, given that the prototechnate will not have at its disposal all the resources of a continent, it will have to acquire them from the existing market. All-in-all such an effort seems hardly revolutionary, all that would be achieved in practice is (possibly) an improved management system.

[Dimentio]

I fail to see how it is possible to create a “prototechnate” within the context of capitalism. Setting aside for a moment the practical problem of having enough capital to actually undertake such a venture (why would anyone who did have enough such capital decide to do so?), isn’t a technocracy only capable of functioning when it has access to sufficient material resources, hence why such proposals are usually for a continent-wide (or world-wide) system.

Moreover, aren’t you in effect just establishing another corporation that will compete within the context of capitalism? After all, given that the prototechnate will not have at its disposal all the resources of a continent, it will have to acquire them from the existing market. All-in-all such an effort seems hardly revolutionary, all that would be achieved in practice is (possibly) an improved management system.

Yes, it would need to trade with the external market. Therefore, we will have a cooperative business interface between the ProtoTech and the market. Reminding a bit of Mondragon I suppose.

[Schrödinger's Cat]

I fail to see how it is possible to create a “prototechnate” within the context of capitalism. Setting aside for a moment the practical problem of having enough capital to actually undertake such a venture (why would anyone who did have enough such capital decide to do so?), isn’t a technocracy only capable of functioning when it has access to sufficient material resources, hence why such proposals are usually for a continent-wide (or world-wide) system.

Moreover, aren’t you in effect just establishing another corporation that will compete within the context of capitalism? After all, given that the prototechnate will not have at its disposal all the resources of a continent, it will have to acquire them from the existing market. All-in-all such an effort seems hardly revolutionary, all that would be achieved in practice is (possibly) an improved management system.

You're assuming this would be done under the context of a bourgeoisie state.

[BobKKKindle$]

Yes, it would need to trade with the external market. Therefore, we will have a cooperative business interface between the ProtoTech and the market. Reminding a bit of Mondragon I suppose.

The problem of raising the initial capital to start this venture has already been identified - but how would this proto-technate secure the funds needed to purchase raw materials and machinery from ordinary capitalist firms which operate according to the profit motive? If workers are paid in energy certificates which only be used to purchase goods which are produced by the proto-techante, why would a worker choose to work for the technate, when a wider range of goods can be purchased using the "ordinary" currency paid by other firms? How would this proto-technate be able to operate legally, given the state has legislation concerning the circulation of alternative currency?

[Dimentio]

The problem of raising the initial capital to start this venture has already been identified - but how would this proto-technate secure the funds needed to purchase raw materials and machinery from ordinary capitalist firms which operate according to the profit motive? If workers are paid in energy certificates which only be used to purchase goods which are produced by the proto-techante, why would a worker choose to work for the technate, when a wider range of goods can be purchased using the "ordinary" currency paid by other firms? How would this proto-technate be able to operate legally, given the state has legislation concerning the circulation of alternative currency?

You see, the proto-technate also exports a part of what it is producing. Of that part, it is attaining a capital stock.

If a worker in a proto-technate wants to attain a plasma screen TV, she simply uses her LC;s/EC;s, to notify the technate, and the technate will then buy her the TV.

Since it does that through the business interface, it could make tax extractions which an ordinary consumer could not. And the workers working in the proto-technate will neither pay any taxes because they have no income.

[BobKKKindle$]

If a worker in a proto-technate wants to attain a plasma screen TV, she simply uses her LC;s/EC;s, to notify the technate, and the technate will then buy her the TV.

An interesting solution - but if workers attain products through a mediator (instead of engaging in commercial interaction directly with the producer of the good the workers wants to buy) is there not the potential for the centralization of power - given that the people who are responsible for organizing the proto-technate have the ability to deny external consumption requests?

[Dimentio]

An interesting solution - but if workers attain products through a mediator (instead of engaging in commercial interaction directly with the producer of the good the workers wants to buy) is there not the potential for the centralization of power - given that the people who are responsible for organizing the proto-technate have the ability to deny external consumption requests?

They don't have that ability. Only our materials limitations do have that ability. The thing is that if a company/business interface buys a plasma screen TV, it pays lower to no VAT depending on what European country you are in - as long as the material is based for the company itself.

And it is. The business interface will be cooperative.

Or rather - it is cooperative - because it already exists.