Technocracy: A new order of the world

Post Reply New Topic

Technocracy is new movement which is growing rapidly.

It's goals is to replace rule by popularity with rule by skill.

Instead of having smooth-talkers as leaders, we will have smooth-thinkers.

Those who will be responsible for infrastructure will be engineers, those who will be responsible for electronics will be programmers and electricians.

Scientists in all fields will be in control of their fields, and have an obligation to make their research public, and to make all their decisions on factual, not emotional grounds.

Irrational monetary systems will be replaced with an objective currency - joules of energy.

Goal will be to create a truly civilised world.

To make the highest possible quality of life for all humans for the longest possible frame of time!

The current civilisation is collapsing.

We must save human race!

Technocrats are offering an alternative.

http://thevenusproject.com
http://technocracynet.eu
http://technocracy.org

The only thing I would fear is that by trying to help humanity as a whole that the individual might lose out. I'm all for logic, but the over analyzing of a bunch of thinkers might make decision making slow. Besides, do you know how pissed religious radicals would be if people like scientists were in power? They might go nuts and start violent protest! Don't tell be they won't either, if some woman is crazy enough to try and get children's books banned from schools they'd definitely protest rulers with scientific thinking.

Yes, it is depleting its resource base and will crumble when it has wasted its own ecological dependencies.

Read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ecological_footprint

Of course we should not jump into it directly!

It is not realistic.

But we could start build the foundations for it, so it will be here in year 2050 or 2100.

Get organised!

Well, why not (get organised)? But considering the system we are in is so opposed to destruction (perhaps by defintion?), it wouldn't be easy. I suspect you already know that energy is abundant and ready for the taking if we have the means to harvest it (duh) which we already do.

But now, what good would it do some fortunate few (even if it would be of good use to the majority of people) if we all knew and were given the means to make use of this? It won't be an easy step- of course new attitudes are a key catalyst but that won't be easy either considering the process of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialization

within the current system.


(lol, you can all tell I'm studying for my sociology mock xDD)

Yes, but whatever we are going to do, it will be tough. That is not excuse to drop off or try to hinder those who are leading the way.

Of course, constructive criticism is always positive contribution to aim, but its important to try to be part of solution, not of problem.

Look for example at the websites I recommended.

I think to be a part of the solution, it is important to work within the problem as well as outside of it. I do ultimately like the idea- I just like to anaylise rather than blindly follow- as that would only lead to damaging the cause. Just as 'the problem' knows how to play us, 'we' must learn to play it/them. The structure of said 'problem' (and by that I mean the summary of an abundance of problems) is based upon subtleties that manipulate our own tendencies and nature in my opinion. It's just a few things to consider- I think the idea in itself is possible but must not fall foul to corruption in either the end or the means to it.

Edit: Of course a lot of that only comes into play as the movement grows. On a small or individual basis it's much less of a thing to worry about. It's just something to be prepared for.

As seductive as Technocracy sounds to anyone who grew up watching Star Trek, it still has the same fundamental flaw that all the other systems have. Central accumulation of power. Don't think scientists are immune to the corrupting effect of concentrated authority. Even worse is the temptation for eugenics and genetic 'improvement' to the human condition. Huxley gave as powerful a warning in 'Brave New World' as Orwell gave in '1984'. And its just as serous a threat to the freedom of the individual.

Though, they have some reasonable ideas in regard to technology and economics. Restoring the currency to being based on something physical rather then the current 'faith backed' currency is the only sane option. And backing a currency with thermodynamic potential is a very grounded way of establishing value. Most of the rest is a rehash of Buckminster Fuller's idea of using science to do the most with the least material and energy.

I conclude that the only hope for overcoming the corruption of centralization is with Relocalizaion. Relocalization grants the greatest autonomy to community and individuals by limiting dependence on societal superstructure. A self sustaining community of persons who are likewise self sufficient is truly free. And in that freedom can come the enlightenment to the responsibility for that freedom and responsibility for the future of the piece of nature and humanity each person inhabits. A communities basic needs should be met locally by its own means. The nature of land ownership must change, currently land ownership is often destructive. The prerogative of the here and now needs to bend to the rights of the future and the land its self. There are laws to protect people and even animals (property) from abuse, so why not the land? Abuse of the earth is abuse of future generations.

Of course this does not mean returning to a more primitive way of life and technology, on the contrary, science and freedom of knowledge are key. An entire 'Open Source' civilization if you will! A world of decentralized volunteer techno-contributors rather then technocrats. A free world for the flow if information and ideas. Also, while basic needs should be addressed locally there still needs to be trade between communities for achieving the grander potentials of technological development and sharing unique products.

I really enjoined this video, it gives a very cool vision of Relocalization combined with Green Technology: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fg6bP6Vw1To

http://www.relocalize.net/about/relocalization

There is a growing technocracy movement. I am planning to start an organisation myself.

The most successful of them seems to be NET, the Network of European Technocrats.

What "centralisation"?

Technocratic movements are very different on that aspect.

North American technocracy movement believes in centralisation while European technocracy movement believes in de-centralisation. They still cooperate on some level.

Read the links.

Zyborg, which 'one' is it that you most identify with- out of curiousity? I've read the links myself, if I've missed anything I apologize but I have ADD tendencies. It would be great to see this or something similar up and running but I'm merely trying to consider flaws as well as strenghs in the way 'we' go about it. The Technocratic movement seems cool at first glance- but understand that this is among my first glances of it- the first being that link you kindly put on the other board.

I think NET seems to have most realist approach to building new civilisation, but they are not as militant as I am.