i unironically think that a technocratic state lead by a communist vanguard party with a party cadre system, a strong independent court system to minimize corruption and cybernetic socialist planning of the economy a la Cockshott would be the best way of organizing a state and perfectly feasible with today's technology. organizing the state along lines of scientific advancement and the resulting improvement of life quality. the overall goal would be to abolish capitalism and replace it with communism. technocracy would be a stepping-stone for transititioning via a scientific socialist society.
Technocracy
Levi Richardson
Asher Roberts
You are a massive retard that didn't even bother to read the Wikipedia article about Technocracy before spouting your nonsense lol
Gabriel Butler
Well Technocracy lacks the suggestion of determinism angle found in Marxism.
From the very start it has been the position of Technocracy that regardless of who ever a Technate is established, it will only be by the blood, sweat and toil of countless brave Technocrats.
Technocracy also does not exactly advocate for one single path to power; Just that however it gains however should be as quick and bloodless as possible.
Personally, I consider a military coup to be the most practical manner of gaining power in the modern world.
However Technocracy is not overly opposed to gaining power democratically should that prove to be more suitable.
Interestingly, Veblen does suggest the idea of the skilled workers of the world (scientists, engineers etc) staging would is basically a general strike to bring society to its knees and implement the system they desire.
However it should be noted that Veblen was not referring to Technocracy and that this suggestion is one of the many ideas of Veblen that were rejected by Technocracy Inc.
Technocracy has the very best aesthetics.
I would recommend that you watch the following if you wish to see what Technocracy was like at its height and gain a better sense of its aesthetics:
youtube.com
Well 'The Theory of the Leisure Class' is a foundational work that I think is required reading in order to gain any understanding of the social/economic critiques of Technocracy.
'The Engineers and the Price System' is probably an even more important work to Technocracy as it was written while Veblen was a member of the precursor organisation to Technocracy and under the influence of the great Howard Scott; However it should be noted that only around 75% of the book is considered part of the Technocracy 'canon', the remaining 25% dealing with the stupid 'Soviet of Engineers' is the sort of rubbish that got him kicked out of that precursor organisation.
'The Theory of Business Enterprise', 'Imperial Germany and the Industrial Revolution' and 'The Vested Interests and the Common Man' are less important works to Technocracy however still worth a read.
Wyatt Adams
Why are technocrats opposed to socialism?
Bentley Adams
It is rather involved.
But the basic Technocratic objection to Socialism comes down to it not going far enough.
The reason for this being that Technocracy is opposed to the price system (the system of scarcity management that capitalism is only one form of), where as socialism is only opposed to capitalism but not the price system.
Technocracy Inc described the USSR as accomplishing little more then painting capitalism red, as the USSR had kept the price system intact and merely changed the form of price system that it used.
This failure to actually strike at the foundations that capitalism is built upon is something that only further infuriates Technocrats due to the lefts instance upon bloody and destructive revolutions.
Bloodshed and disruption all for a new coat of paint over the same of fundamental system.
Caleb Morales
How does this differ from stock standard socialist thought?
Andrew Lewis
You seem to misunderstood my point if that was your take away from my post.
What I was getting at is that socialism in general is seen by Technocrats as just a red form of price system; A close neighbour to capitalism.
Technocracy does not consider a neighbour to capitalism to be anywhere good enough and seeks to dispose of the very foundations upon which capitalism (and socialism) stand.
Technocracy could not care less if the USSR was a Communist utopia or some state capitalist regime.
The point is that at there core, both systems are the same.
Technocracy seeks to build a new system altogether; Hence the assertion that socialism for all of its bluster and bloodshed does simply not go far enough.
Isaac Murphy
These foundations are? The fact things have a price?
Also, in a technocratic society, how are the guys at the top chosen? How are those guys at the top not proletariat? Are they not merely administrators?
Ian James
It's a fantasy for nerds who were bullied by desperately thinking that a person qualified to program a computer should be able to run a nation, it's bullshit; skills in one area don't necessarily have to affect skills in another. See also: "Halo effect."
I also vaguely recall Howard Scatt wanting to build GANGSTER COMPUTER GOD COMMUNISM and worship the machine and do whatever it says. My question: who gets to design the computer? And computers need an axiom to decide ethicality, so it will be determined by whether its built by deontologists or consequentialists. In short, stop playing Deus Ex and read a book.
Julian Sanchez
...