Technocracy

Post Reply New Topic

1. The modern day market economy is also a planned system. The only difference on that aspects is that planning in production schemes is undertaken by the state and the companies today, while in the technate it would sort under the technate and under holons, which indeed could compete about getting the projects done.

2. You could get your own ideal car customised on a depot, and use it for as long as you want through your energy certifikate. But when you are not going to use it anymore, just return it to the depot [or it will most likely drive there by itself when you get out of energy credits or have unplugged your certifikate for a specific amount of time.

3. No matter how much money or wealth you got in the Roman empire, the city of Rome is today producing more energy in one day than the entire Roman empire produced in one year. Face it. We have a wholly different situation today.

You are probably right on that, especially given the fact that technocrats seek to do crazy things like move everyone out of cities into little communities, remove the pre-existing property right structure, etc. To do such things would offend those with power and a good portion of the middle class as well and given the fact that you are right, it would take revolution and create power vacuums in doing this, it would corrupt the system, as few revolutions work perfectly especially if the concepts are revolutionary. I am mostly addressing the issue that I believe a technocratic economy wouldn't do as well as a capitalistic economy due to the fact that incentives will be poor, and that people want their own property, and that a planned technocratic economy won't be as efficient because of poor incentives and issues with the amount of necessary trade-offs and calculating what is good through that. I should probably stop though, it likely isn't worth discussing as it is unlikely to ever be implemented and it basically ends up being the same type of discussion as a communism vs capitalism debate like happens when dealing with a diehard communist(s) and a few capitalists and those really go nowhere.

Of course we have a strategy in Europe for that. Albeit we are not going to set for any elections, we are going to build our community network from scratch and then continuously expanding and developing it, using it both as an expansion ground and as a way to make experiments upon ourselves.

And P.S - It is not centrally planned when consumers are controlling what is going to be produced through their EC;s.

No, it is an interactive economy where consumers through their energy credits are deciding what is going to be produced.

Sectorial planning of infrastructure exists in most developed countries today. If you believe that is central planning, then both the EU and the USA are planned economies.

After reading about it, I conclude that it's nothing more than a form of high tech totalitarian communism.
Furthermore, being a programmer and SF reader, I'm a total luddite when it comes to machines controlling stuff.
They're even more flawed than we are.
The society drawn up in those articles would be something fetched straight from my worst nightmares.
I'd rather EVEN live in an anarchy.
At least then I could go wherever I wanted and keep my currency units as long as I wish, and not be bothered by people I either couldn't dispose of or that would want to control every aspect of my life.

"Technocracy" is just another form of State Socialism, which, as a Libertarian Socialist, I abhor.

Actually, NET;s version of technocracy is more related to your ideology than to stalinism.

The organization of Canada, the USA, and Mexico into a single "technate", something that is required to prove the theory, would be next to impossible.