Thoughts on technocracy? Pretty based if you ask me

>>3027563
It's pretty much the "end credits" of civilization.

>>3027574
care to elaborate

>>3027576
nah not really

File: 145218-004-3A764C78.jpg (25KB, 325x450px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 325x450px

>>3027563
History suggests having an uncountable burreaucracy of "experts" running things isnt based at all. I wish the scientism meme would die.

>>3027563
Why the fuck do people think is some sort of "rule of technology"?
The techno is there because of "technicals", who are people qualified in doing state stuff.

>>3027576
Basically no more charismatic leaders to keep the public busy.
>>3027580
Fuck off

>DUDE SCIENCE SOLVES EVERYTHING LMAO

Scientists are important, but they aren't the people who can run a nation.

>>3027563
At first glance. But who's to say these capable experts will actually do the job? Everybody looks after their own interests, and if they're not accountable there's no reason for them to do good. It's like democracy now, but with even less repercussions, at least now the rulers have to try and appease their voters.

File: thatcher.jpg (255KB, 1484x1494px)

255KB, 1484x1494px

>>3027607
you've got some explaining to do

>>3027619
Not that anon but for God's sake op science inherrently cannot make ethical judgements. We could be a more advnaced society if we were allowed to kidnap and experiment on everyone but no one would stand for that.

>>3027619
Ok, let me spell it out for you.

Scientists exist to further technology. Politicians exist to protect the values and the sovereignty of a nation in whatever way they see fit. These are two very different aspects of human development. Sure, Thatcher started out as a chemist for a plastics company, but she soon realized her calling was in politics.

File: eternal german.jpg (88KB, 853x480px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 853x480px

>>3027623
>>3027626
Merkel has a phd in quantum chemistry and we all know what her leadership led to.

>>3027632
Merkel is pretty good tbqh

File: Technocrats.jpg (114KB, 570x800px)

114KB, 570x800px

>>3027563
The historical American Technocracy Movement?
Pretty based, they introduced a number of great ideas.
Just add a dash of Stratocracy to them and you get a literally perfect ideology.

If you are however referring to what people generally mean when they refer to Technocracy today (Veblenism) or some silly conspiracy theory, it is rather shit.

>>3027632
Germany has been a world-leader basically ever since she took power. Great economy, great tech.

File: thoreau1a.jpg (6KB, 200x237px)

6KB, 200x237px

Technocracy will lead to enslavement. All the major technological advances in human history have lead to more humans but less humanity.

Everything from agriculture to the internet has only worked against us, giving the illusion that it has done us a great favor.

>>3027639
>>3027642

She has absolutely no ideals or goals besides maintaining power for herself. She has flip flopped every single issue that ever came up and went with whatever was most popular at the time. She has used anti-democratic psyops to win her elections. She is a machiavellian asshole who doesn't give a fuck about right and wrong.
She will support nation destroying, overtly bad policies if they are popular with a vocal minority of the population.

>>3027647
DUDE TECHNOLOGY IS BAD LMAO
wew

>>3027647
>running around in loinclothes spearing deer is more human than inventing animal factories
>>3027649
It's called pragmatism. Until you point out how Germany is being destroyed, you have no argument

>>3027574

There was a psycho pass 2 so your point is moot

>>3027642
Harry Truman also was a great leader and he only had a high school diploma. It's almost as if leadership ability isnt always tied to education.

>>3027657
Truman was a fucking horrible leader

File: 1498750533048.jpg (96KB, 640x640px)

96KB, 640x640px

>>3027657
>Harry Truman also was a great leader

File: evola.png (35KB, 217x299px)

35KB, 217x299px

>>3027652
It is. It is unavoidable because of the nature of human beings and power, but it has brought us nothing but material gain and "comfort" in exchange for liberty and the "realness" of life. Everything we have now are surrogate activities.

Life is already fleeting and filled with suffering, it is your fear of this that makes you bend to the will of the technocrat. It is your foolish fear of death that brings you to your knees in awe of "progress".

>>3027654
>pragmatism
Pragmatism is doing what you think furthers your goal.
Merkels only goal is to maintain power for herself. She has destroyed her party, damaged German democracy with continued application of asymmetric demobilization, damaged the German economy with her decision to ax nuclear power immediately catching the mood after Fukushima. She let in two million niggers and muslims who are unemployable and who are 90% male. These people will destroy German society in the next years, as the aging population stresses the welfare system beyond the braking point. At the moment, these people only cost 30 billion a year, but that will increase, and doesn't take the crime and stress they cause into account.
She also allowed homosexuals to marry, because it was popular. The law is called "marriage for anyone", implying anyone can marry anything, but who cares about precision in legal matters? Laws are to make people feel good and make them re-elect politicians.

And Merkel will be re-elected. She has succeeded, according to the only metric she cares about.

>>3027659
He refused to let MacArthur nuke the chinks and his policy of containment proved to be the right choice.

>>3027663
>She also allowed homosexuals to marry
>Angela Merkel votes against same sex marriage law in Germany 'because marriage is between a man and woman'
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/angela-merkel-same-sex-marriage-vote-germany-legalisation-lgbt-rights-christian-democrat-man-woman-a7815846.html

>>3027663
And her goal is to make Germany an economic superpower. She succeeded. I agree that the migrant problem is bad, but Germany is so strong that even they can deal with it for now.
>>3027667
If he didn't kiss Stalin's ass and allow Communist Jews to infiltrate the government, what happened in Korea may not have even been necessary

>>3027661
>Life is already fleeting and filled with suffering
Live is pretty good tbqh. I have internet, lads and etc.

File: ted-kaczynski.jpg (13KB, 300x225px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 300x225px

>>3027672
I'm not saying "life doesn't have things that are good", but that it is filled with suffering. Suffering comes in many forms and intensities. Think of the many people suffering from diseases of the brain or body, of old age, of injuries, of emotional turmoil, of stress, etc.

It is your fear of these things that causes you to willingly give up your own agency.

>>3027679
>Think of the many people suffering from diseases of the brain or body, of old age, of injuries, of emotional turmoil, of stress, etc.
Yeah, but thanks to technology we can cure them and make them happy

>>3027669
She allowed the law to pass by allowing her party to vote for it. Otherwise it wouldn't have passed. Don't comment and things you don't understand.

>>3027670
>And her goal is to make Germany an economic superpower
It isn't she damaged Germany through several decisions. Germany has full employment because a lot of the population is extremely old, that's not a good thing, especially not if you add millions of violent muslims males on welfare to the mix.

>>3027682
The only things in that list that can be cured sometimes are injuries, the rest is basically just something that has to be handled by the person it afflicts. Maybe there will be a cure, but it's at least 30-60 years away.

File: 1466125460381.jpg (162KB, 770x600px) Image search: [Google]

162KB, 770x600px

>>3027682
Did not read the last part? Every time arrogant man "fixes" something, he loses a part of himself.

You are forced to get up every day to work for a system, not for yourself. I would rather risk early death, pain, and disease than to live a day not working directly for mine and my kin's survival in a natural manner.

It is painful to live natural, but (and this is my opinion and the opinion of many primitivist types) a natural life simply possess better satisfaction than modernity.

File: max.gif (5KB, 200x175px)

5KB, 200x175px

>>3027696
>You are forced to get up every day to work for a system, not for yourself.
everything I do I do for myself. I do everything to achieve my life goals

>>3027696

Have you tried living the life you promote? If so, why did you stop? And if not, why haven't you dropped everything and moved to some uninhabited shithole like Canadian north?

>a natural life simply possess better satisfaction than modernity

You provided absolutely zero arguments for this aside from "I kinda feel like this hehe".

>>3027563
Machines are fools, they don't have mind. We now don't have reasonable machines therefore technocracy can't be

>>3027696
>It is painful to live natural, but (and this is my opinion and the opinion of many primitivist types) a natural life simply possess better satisfaction than modernity.
*dies from some shity disease*

>>3027696
>a natural life simply possess better satisfaction than modernity.
Cool, then practice what you preach. Leave your apartment and all your material possessions, and walk off into the woods. You won't make it one week.

However, I do get what you're trying to convey: that a simpler life leads to more satisfaction, which any sane man would agree with. Personally, living in a small town/village with a wife and a few kids is all I want in life. But what you're trying to convey is that we should resort to complete barbarianism and abandon all the social progress we have made throughout the ages. So like I said, try being a homeless nomad and see how that works out for you.

>>3027725
Technocracy =/=matrix shit
Do you even know what technocracy is?

File: 1390270238578.jpg (331KB, 1920x1200px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1920x1200px

>>3027736
>>3027731
>>3027716

I first need to learn HOW to survive. I've read, watched, and practiced countless things in preparation. But you have to remember that prehistoric humans have families, and tribes to tell them the ways of survival and to lookout for them

Modern society encourages social alienation and does not promote survivalism.

So I can't "practice what I preach" because even if I have children and form a "tribe" they will be lulled by civilization soon enough, and some would even consider living in such conditions as "child abuse" especially if any of them die or become ill.

Thus, the state will lock me away.

So fuck off with the "HURR DURR JUST GO TO THE WOODS" shit, because until society is dismantled such things are impossible.

The only thing I can do is warn you of further "progress". And retards like OP are even more dangerous than capitalists or commies.

>>3027731
Also this poster conveys my primary point. It is better to die in complete and utter anguish than it is to live one moment as a slave.

But you are ruled by your fear of pain and death. I can't fault you completely for that, only point out how it will spell the death of humanity and possibly the planet.

>>3027912
>>3027923
Oh my God, you actually are underage.

>>3027928
Is that really your argument?

I suggest you do some reading about the sociological and psychological effects of industrialized society.

I then encourage you to read about guys like Edward Bernays who created the methods in which the capitalist class "sells" systematic consumption and "advancement" to people.

Read about what this never-ending consumption and expanding is doing to the Earth.

Then come back when you realize how delicate and fragile the balance of the ecosystem on this planet is and tell me I'm just "underage".

Because clearly the mark of maturity is cognitive dissonance for people like you, that or sheer ignorance.

>>3027928
To elaborate with an analogy, you are akin to people who work jobs like mining in this era. The ones that depend on the work, and the mine is all they've ever known. So they defend it because they don't realize they can do something else. Because doing something else is risky, and painful and they would rather avoid that.

So what do they do when some of the miners start to fight back against poor conditions?

They justify the poor conditions. They claim anyone who dares change the system is "lazy", or "immature", or a "communist". Because him and his dead of cancer grandpappy have been mining for generations.

>>3027942
>>3027951
If you truly believe in the shit you're trying to tell us, then get the fuck off 4chan and just do it.

>>3027563
wouldn't trust those nerds with power

>>3027563
Good in theory. In reality it basically means banks and international monetary agencies imposing economic austerity on countries who are being bad goys.

>>3027563
>Pretty based
Friendly reminder that Clinton was the technocrat candidate, and ran her campaign almost entirely off of computer simulations.

>>3027642
A great economy doesn't have to be propped up by the massive importation of third worlders m8.

>>3027563
Technocracy as in "ministries should be led by experts in their fields" or "a country should be led by engineers and physicists"? The former is logical, the latter is pure retardation and a nerd wet dream.

>>3027563
"Technocracy" = a police state turning you into a slave for the government and big corporations.

If you don't believe me, look at singapore. They're rich, but they have no freedom, no privacy, and if you fail to fit into the conformist box you are entirely fucked. Also, because it's not democratic and everyone is appointed by elites supposedly according to ability, it's corrupt as shit because the public can't do anything to get rid of officials who fuck them over.

>>3027563
Pretty retarded. People with specialized educations are pretty useless outside of their specific fields, its why Ben Carson despite being a brilliant surgeon thinks the Pyramids of Giza were grain silos. Just because you know math and science doesn't mean you know shit about geopolitics and economics.

I feel like the song I am the very model of a modern major general is quite applicable in this situation, a bunch of skills, none of which apply to your actual field of work.

>>3027563
Like most forms of government, it probably looks a lot better on paper than in practice.

>>3028815
How is Ben Carson being uneducated on ancient Egypt connected to his ability to govern? Also surgeons despite memes usually aren't that smart, some of them are literal retards. They just have fantastic dexterity.

>>3027642
I think can all agree that her decision to flood Europe with violent Muslims was one of her less solid ideas.

>muh with a technocracy we can guarantee the leadership will have some base level of intelligence and understanding of how the world works.

And how are you going to do that? Where is the proofs that top scientists understand how the world works, or would make better policies than what we currently have?
I mean hell, you could completely refluff this argument to say the same thing about rule by a military junta. After all, they rose to the top through hard work, and you can't get into a senior military position today without a good chunk of academic credentials. We should all run our governments by the military, it totally won't be a failure like every time it's tried!

Sure, if that means putting actual experts in fields they hold expertise in. Such as economists in financial positions, legal scholars in law, engineers in energy etc.

But generally speaking it's absolutely retarded equating people being competent in one field to be competent in others. Just walk into an engineering workplace or a lab and you'll see.

Does that mean a bunch of autists will rule? What could go wrong?

File: 636030757259556361-1129479309_elon-musk.jpg (263KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

263KB, 1920x1080px

We need Elon Musk as dictator for life.

>>3027563
Alsmost all the problems of socialism and communism apply to technocracy ten fold.

Ask China. they have a government of STEM grads running things.

>>3027563
honestly when i first scolled past, I thought this said theocracy, and I thought to myself 'well its a pretty old idea but to each his own i guess'

>>3028892
It illustrates that people are useless outside of their fields of expertise. Having statesmen who aren't educated in any field of statecraft (law, economics, politics, warfare) is stupid because its no different than having any other specialized people from outside fields govern. Lets have only teachers as politicians. Lets have only factory floor workers as politicians. Lets only have farmers, miners, or foresters as politicians.

There is nothing about people in technology fields that makes them inherently good politicians and while there is nothing that prevents an engineer or scientist from being a good politician it is retarded to use that logic to justify only letting engineers and scientists be politicians.

File: -1x-1.jpg (142KB, 1024x647px)

142KB, 1024x647px

>>3027563
Yes, stupid people cannot be trusted with power.

>>3029891
USSR used to be run by engineering grads in 70s-80s. Didn't end well.

>>3030074
>B
that is because they had an oil dependent economy.

the oil crisis was good for the soviets in the 70s. the oil glut was bad for the soviets in the 80s.

>>3027607
I think i agree with this. Then again: The general biggest problem of any government, is that you end up with a ruling class/aristocracy that have little to no life experience.
And because they have neither of them, they have no ground contact, and by proxy no loyalty to the host nation or other social classes.

There is a gigantic difference between Norway/Sweden/Denmark in how the nations are ruled, as their positions around nobility is fundamentally different, even more so when Norway lacks nobility post 13th century.

>>3030078
That's true. This is what leaders are for, to act against adverse circumstances. This is also why technocracy is not a good idea.
History's big difference from hard sciences is that everything happens for the first time. You can't predict anything with any certainty because the world is just so complex. If you think you can, try to prove that to an impartial observer, but first try to find someone truly impartial.

>>3027640
Why would you reserve positions of power to the military specifically?

Progress for the sake of progress is the ideology that will ultimately doom humanity.
We should focus on humanitarian roles, education, environmentalism, and maybe there's still time for us to get on the right path and not kill ourselves before we get out of the solar system.

File: Gandalf_Laugh.gif (607KB, 400x200px) Image search: [Google]

607KB, 400x200px

>>3030215
>We should focus on humanitarian roles
>When humanitarian academia is occupied by insane crazy people with no ground contact
>And lower nobility/oligarchs who has never worked a day's labor in their life

>>3030109
>The general biggest problem of any government, is that you end up with a ruling class/aristocracy that have little to no life experience.
>And because they have neither of them, they have no ground contact, and by proxy no loyalty to the host nation or other social classes.
This is a good point. A case in point, Late USSR ruling elite came from a single generation that was literally raised from dust by Soviet power. Their raise was exceptionally fast because the generation of elite before it was destroyed in the Purges, and their rule was exceptionally long because what could be the next generation didn't live past twenty: people born around 1920 mostly died fighting in the War, especially dedicated Communists who typically served as NCOs on the frontline. You can imagine how much their life experience differed from that of the people that they ruled and whose interests they claimed to represent.

>>3030109

>There is a gigantic difference between Norway/Sweden/Denmark in how the nations are ruled, as their positions around nobility is fundamentally different, even more so when Norway lacks nobility post 13th century.
I know that Denmark had a kind of a putsch in 18 century that removed what nobility they had from power, and Sweden turned their nobility into a kind of martial elite.

>>3027955
Why don't you instead check the things he recommended you and see if he's actually right? You can't be bothered huh?
People like you frustrate me so much.

>>3030230
>I don't like the people who I see talking about this subject the most
>therefore we should just ignore it, I'm sure it's not important
Jesus christ

>>3027626
>>3027623
>Scientists exist to further technology. Politicians exist to protect the values and the sovereignty of a nation in whatever way they see fit
Okay fine - but technocracy doesn't necessarily mean having scientists in charge. It means having experts in charge. So you can still have politicians in charge. Trained, professional, politicians.

Rather than whoever happens to win the charisma contest.

And, really, even if you chose to rig it to have scientists in charge, at least folks with Ph.D.'s took at least one ethics class and are aware of the basics. Getting ethical behavior out of someone voting by charisma is 50/50, at best.

File: tu1942.jpg (65KB, 800x564px)

65KB, 800x564px

>>3030183
That is not what I'm getting at, friend.
What I mean is a merger of the state and military into a single entity.
Use the military 'rank' hierarchy as an organizational tool for society.

File: 1276536086190.jpg (376KB, 1500x1200px)

376KB, 1500x1200px

>>3030270
Thats missing the forests for the trees anon. There is difference between humanitarian values(pre cold war) and humanitarian society after USA won the cold war.
Even more so when "humanitarian society" is in its third and fourth generation, essentially having no ties with how society works past their second generation. And thats before you add the bonus of USA winning the cold war(value export), the artificial distancing from classic Marxism

But that by itself is also insignificant. The biggest problem with Humanitarian values, is that since Cold War is over, Internationalism is now one ideology, instead of 3(USSR's export, the French export of it, USA's export of it).
And Internationalism isn't worth anything, since it holds no value to what builds society.
And since it holds no connections/roots/fundamentals, it has no place when society has to be carried by the last 5% that is doing refining/mining/agriculture, and is willing to jeopardize stability for international shit points.

>>3027585
why woud you use Diaz as a counterexample, he achieved massive growth from 1890 to 1906 for all his flaws

>>3027696
>natural manner.
>"""""natural"""""
what did he mean by this?

>>3027563
how can it be based when it's just don quixote in disguise?

>>3030238
Its also why there is so many "party commisar", "local judge" and other such things. And why they end up as these gigantic jokes.

They have no life experience, and act like hungry thugs, and end up doing it for all their lives. Simply because they have no respect for their contemporaries. And by existing, they make their contemporaries worse people.

Alltmodern sate have some degree of Techoncracy already, in civil services and beuracracies.

I think have people being qualified in generall is a good thing but the problem is what qualifications are need for what job, and it's very hard to objecively define what makes a good leader. The other big problem, especially in the state beauracraies that currently exist is tansparancey and accountablity. Such systems are often complicated and it's difficulty to clearly see who does what, let alone if they're any good at it. Finally they're rather slow due to that same complexity.

>>3030321
What I meant when I said we should focus on "humanitarian" values, and perhaps that was not the word for it, is that the pace of our technological advancement we're so obsessed with, often at the expense or the complete disregard for morality, or the potential long term impact of it, should take a second place behind environmentalism, general welfare and education in areas like philosophy, less practical values perhaps that ensure that our aim as a species is not pointless.
And a technocracy is gonna do the exact opposite of that.

>>3027955
yeah gotta agree with the other anon. the guy might be a hypocrite but pointing that out doesn't make his argument wrong. by destroying the environment for short term gain we're preparing a mass grave humanity and biological life more generally

>>3028748
M8 she was in power well before the refugee crisis

>>3028892
>How is Ben Carson being uneducated on ancient Egypt connected to his ability to govern?
hahahah are you serious? If he can't use alleged "scientific" frame of mind to understand basic history and the idiocy of his seventh day adventist beliefs, by the same token how do you expect his medical abilities will make him more suited to govern than a politician or bureaucrat with years of controlling govenrment and implementing policies?

>>3029891
yes, and you know the One-Child Policy was based off a graph made the trajectory of a ballistic missile?? really makes you think about "scientific" policies in a whole new light!

File: 1486965812632.png (154KB, 2696x1706px)

154KB, 2696x1706px

>>3030405
wrong smuggie

>>3029891
no they don't.

dude just stop.

>>3030249
While thats true, it also goes deeper. Because nobility still view themselves are nobility, and so they organize themselves as nobility.
And to this day, you still find nobility in the upper echelons of Sweden/Denmarks various political organs, industry, and a whole bunch of stuff.
Meanwhile Norway has a bunch of people running a few weird state corporations, and no will to do anything equal the bigger private companies their neighbors have.

I would love to hear a Finn's perspective on this, since its a complex case.

>>3030109
>Then again: The general biggest problem of any government, is that you end up with a ruling class/aristocracy that have little to no life experience.
oh please, like working some insipid job for 40 years means you've lived
civilization is not built for the plebs, it's built for people who manage to achieve great things
the plebs usually get by because their enormous numbers need to be placated either way

>>3030469
You are not even addressing the angle. You are stating that rulers should have WILL and AMBITION.
Thats a fine and good statement. But that do not affect the angle of perspective. If you have WILL & AMBITION, you get shit like Kim Il-sung where you end up doing genocides because you think rice fields in mountains is good idea, without any considerations of why rice fields can be built in mountains.

You are also not addressing how a class society works, or what work is. So your statement is of little value, with no insight.

>>3027563
too much hubris

>>3027563
Intelligence isn't a moral virtue. The scientific method gives you a nuke, you need something else to decide when and if to ever use it.

File: 1293221370340.jpg (732KB, 1600x898px)

732KB, 1600x898px

>>3027912
>>3027942
Why are you so badly underage? So there is a lot of signs, such as the excessive use of weasel words just to make a untrue argument.
>encourages
>lulled
>consider living in such conditions
>especially if
>the state
>muh JAIL
>you are akin
>doing something else is risky
>claim
>"lazy", or "immature", or a "communist"
Please kill yourself.

A term popularized to describe the people who ran the US war effort in Vietnam. What an example to follow.

>>3029842
Oh yeah, nothing like a hype man who can never deliver on his promises to run a country

>>3027649
So she's a successful politician?

>>3027585
this.

>>3027951
>So they defend it because they don't realize they can do something else.
Because most of them can't do anything else and are useless. Why do you think the industrialisation era had so many revolutionist idea? Because unlike earlier times peoplehad the means to fight instead of getting replaced and die on the street to starvation because their whole working experience and knowhow has been made useless.

And still people died in poverty. And now thing about why all of the sudden the elites are talking about a "basic income". It's bread and circus for the soon to be useless plebs. This and all that entertainment is only there to distrect you from the fact that you're becomming useless for those in power. Expect further population control in the future. They wont pay you and your useless kids free gibs for all eternaty.

>>3032061
Why are you such a piece of shit, with such a useless baseless statement, without any argument to back the logic you present?

>>3027563
How do you even define it? A lot of people seem to have different ideas on what it means.

Generally, it means that you elect politicians the same way you do in every representative democracy, but then these politicians instead of ruling, pick specialists to rule - basically outsourcing the rulership to private contractors who are specialists in a given field of policy.

A lot of countries are already technocratic like that in many ways. The USA military, for example, which is well hated by the same people who put technocracy avatars on their twitter accounts.

The problem is ignorant beasts don't like to be guided in a useful manner.

>>3027588
I think most people follow technocracy because they want a successful farmer in charge of agriculture, instead of a lawyer or historian, or whatever career politicians graduate these days.
Watch some youtube videos of scientists trying to explain how global warming works to senators, when they are given five minutes and a room full of people who can't tell the difference between weather and climate.

>>3027588
Its just a general short fix knee jerk reaction, because everyone hates lawyers, and most "developed" democracies in the west is 95% lawyers & unemployed low nobility.

>>3030376
>durr technology doesnt care about environment and morality.
>doesnt even know what a technocracy is
This is why humanities should be discarded. Its useless, yet they act like they have some higher moral ground.

>>3032678
>Why are you such a piece of shit, with such a useless baseless statement, without any argument to back the logic you present?

Why are you such a piece of shit, with such a useless baseless statement, without any argument to back the logic you present?

>>3030308
Soldiers are fucking stupid anon and you should stop the hero worship.

>>3030412
A technocracy isn't socialist or communist or in any sense collectivist you god damned retard.

>>3027563
Problem with Technocracy is that it assumes that the world is built like a machine, and can be operated like a machine. However reality, and people are more complex. These were the same problems that faced the USSR.

>>3030308
That already happened. See: Tsarist Russia and its "table of ranks" modeled off of the Kingdom of Denmark's rank system. It was in place from Peter the Great till 1917. Read some Gogol but any Russian novelist will do if you want to see how lovely it worked.

>>3033713
>>3033923
>missing the point, the posts

>>3030351
It means without artificial inventions. The line is blurry at times but I think it's pretty comprehensible.

>>3027607
This.

Everybody knows money grubbing property developers and shark lawyers are the only people truly capable of it, dumb goyim.

>>3027563
They make it sound like everything is run by scientists, economists, engineers but in reality it's run by ex goldman sachs employees

>>3027585
>Le Diaz was a incompetent meme leader
There was great growth in Mexico under his leadership.

>>3035563
Technocracy is actually basically what we have right now. Rule by unaccountable "experts" (who are actually really bad at their job because they have no life experience in anything but their narrow field).

>>3027623
>We could be a more advnaced society if we were allowed to kidnap and experiment on everyone but no one would stand for that.

If we select certain people and have good PR people would not care about those people being targeted directly or not. Like look at the fucked up shit that happened to get the shit we liked.

File: 1412041223350.png (4KB, 196x265px)

4KB, 196x265px

>>3035581
The 2008 crisis made it very apparent none of these """experts""" have any clue how the economy actually functions

>>3035611
The fact that you think the experts have any control over the economy makes it very apparent you have no clue how the economy actually functions.

>>3035611
They did, it's just that corporate lobbyists won out.

>>3027607

Science pretty much did solve everything.

I mean you are welcome to go back in the woods and shit in a cave covered by lice and die at the old age of 30.

>>3035611
Economy is not even a science for starters

>>3035581
>Rule by unaccountable "experts"
many of those experts are lawyers

>>3035581

No, China is run by engineers, PHDs, and various other scientists.

USA is run by lawyers and lobbyists.

>>3035650
The fact that they think they have any control over the economy makes it very apparent they have no clue how the economy actually functions.

>>3035671
most economists actually know they have no control over the economy, they just check historical records, contrast them with the current context and try to device incentive policies which will make individual actors perform in such a way it will be beneficial to the economy at large (each individual tackling their own set of obstacles to reach the incentive)
no professional economist thinks they control the economy, the markets, or the individual actors; it is all a gambit of "we'll do X and maybe the people will do Y"

>>3033906
But people operate like machine. A poorly understand and extremely complex machine.
Then again, 19th century people would have a panic attack if they where to examination a modern CNC machine, simply because of how complex it is, yet elegant and few in parts.

>>3035668
They are still low nobility. All that means, is that their ambition is bigger, and so is their ground contact.
I would argue the dictatorial party rule is far more beneficial than the PHD's, simply because they don't have to do a dick waggling with their counterparts or other party blocks.

File: Theodore_Kaczynski.jpg (139KB, 555x414px) Image search: [Google]

139KB, 555x414px

>>3027942
> Edward Bernays
This man is way cooler

>>3027563
why don't we have leaders carefully raised from birth to be ideal rulers? if we just got the system for educating them right, wouldn't that be the ideal way to come up with technocratic leaders?

>>3027563
literally the most autistic ideology

>>3027955
>Herd mentality at work

>No mention of Nick Land

I'm reporting everyone in this thread.

>>3027563
That pic is hilarious.

>>3036126
We had a system like that, and then a bunch of nouveau riche got uppity.

>>3036746
>Nick "I wish we could live in a despotic monarchy with me as the king" Land

File: 1493600449810.jpg (278KB, 1072x1062px)

278KB, 1072x1062px

Jesus Christ why are all of you people absent mindingly assuming that because the term has "techno" in it, it must mean "durr scientists and engineer running everything :DDDddD." Why the fuck would you go out of your way to start forming arguments about a concept without having the slightest idea of what it actually means beyond some rudimentary assumption?

>>3035203
Missing what point? Not trolling explain yourself senpai

>>3035438
everything is natural...

>>3036126
So... a monarchy?

>>3038635
Technocracy means the decision making part of the government is made up of appointed specialists, instead of elected politicians.
Specialist implies scientist/engineer in much of modern policy making, and a bunch of military guys for the foreign policy.

Its just the reality of modern policies, that they require engineers/scientists for every meaningful decision.

File: Technocracy_Defeat_Fascism.jpg (199KB, 1600x1200px) Image search: [Google]

199KB, 1600x1200px

>>3040147
Not the person you are responding to.
But I do tend to agree that they missed my point.

I was not advocating a military dictatorship or a ruling military caste.
The system that I advocate would see the military and state become a single, unified object.
All citizens of working age would go through basic military training, be given a rank and put to work in a 'corps' (in this context, basically a 'corporation' or 'syndicate' from syndicalism or corporatism).

>>3041167
You better have figured out some way to fight nepotism and handle inheritance, else your system is doomed to quickly turn into despotic monarchy with a strong aristocracy and a mad peasantry.

File: 2737340_orig.jpg (75KB, 800x584px)

75KB, 800x584px

>>3041173
I believe that I have.
Humans have an innate desire for religion, I have decided to take advantage that via a state secular religion ala Auguste Comte.
When you have a fanatical population that considers Meritocracy/Technocracy to be a religious imperative, the risk of nepotism is greatly reduced.

Even more so when you rid the citizenry of the burden of reproduction and raising of children.
I would consider nepotism impossible when ones only parental figure is the state itself.

>>3041194
People are turning away from religious with thousands of years of tradition to them, your brand new religion will be hard to enforce, and you will have many heretics. Their rebellions will be supported by foreign governments too.

File: 19659236.jpg (152KB, 800x600px)

152KB, 800x600px

>>3041203
>People are turning away from religious
The Abrahamic faiths do not represent all of religion.
I do not think one has to look very far in western society to see popular secular institutions that have many similarities to formal religion.
Hell, the ever popular new-age garbage is nothing more then a modern form of secular mysticism.

I think that modern western society shows that secular religion is quite palatable to most people.

>your brand new religion will be hard to enforce
No more so then any state religion.

>you will have many heretics
Sure.
But such people can be dealt with.

>Their rebellions will be supported by foreign governments too
I society I advocate is just about as closed as a society can be.
It would even have its own version of the internet, built upon a centralized infrastructure.
The ability for foreign governments to 'support' and sort of rebellion would be limited to empty words.

>>3041203
>Join some 1930s funded Humanitarian organization
>Its basically organized religion without GOD

File: 1392503902155.jpg (344KB, 2000x1485px) Image search: [Google]

344KB, 2000x1485px

Well, it doesn't matter if you like technocracy or not, because it's coming very soon, and it's already been true to a certain extent the last 60 years.

I mean, no private company owns nuclear weapons, which means that there is a single entity that holds the most awesome technological power already.

At some point in the future, the mere fact of the existence of technology, will by default make governments totalitarian.

File: 5438402145_64284b2e4d_o.jpg (31KB, 495x353px)

31KB, 495x353px

>>3041827
Like most people in this thread, you seem to have a rather loose definition of what constitutes a Technocracy.

>>3027563

It sounds good in theory, but then you remember that humans are fallible and easily corrupted and discover that the system of appointing political figures who are (in theory) answerable to an electorate does a far better job of keeping leaders "honest-ish" than any conceivable "secret police" can, and that for all their faults political leaders at least take account of a broad range of possible downsides before implementing policy and always have an eye on the public mood while technocratic elites think themselves superior to those they rule and have no restrictions on the kind of anti-human systems they can put in place.

Like Gommunism, it's a great idea that is ruined by human nature. Maybe robots will get good use out of technocracy, humans tend to get more bad than good from it.

It's a meme. It is obvious that the ministers should be experts in the fields they govern over. There's no need in inventing a totally new ideology out of it.

As for prime ministers and presidents, their education should be relatively unimportant as long as they have good organizational skills and can appoint right people to the right jobs.

>>3027649
>people vote for politicans who only appease minorities at the expense of the general population
It's a republic, if the public want protected minorities, they're gonna get it, and if they don't then they can vote her out.

>>3027912
>So fuck off with the "HURR DURR JUST GO TO THE WOODS" shit, because until society is dismantled such things are impossible.
Yeah, the canadian tax collecters are really concerned about islands that have literally never seen a human being touch foot on.