I suspect that the arising technocracy of the future will be constituted by a fusion of a comprehensive global industrial technocracy that will operate as a central coordinating body of the global industrial energy-resource infrastructure that maintains all of the requirements of urban living. Disemployment should be widespread in 20 years given the acceleration of ephemeralization. Within this infrastructure individuals will be able to exchange goods and services as they choose.
I think some sort of technocracy seems inevitable in a technological age, but I would resent ditching America's founding principles or its flag in favor of Technocracy Inc's ugly-red colored yin-yang logo which seems have an air of communism about it. I'd rather that future generations have our flag to serve as an ultimate reminder of those who shed blood while fighting to be free. The more people recognize this, the less likely they will be manipulated by privileged and talented control freaks.
The yin-yang sign represents balance between production and consumption. I would think our flag would remain same if we were to become a technate. The American flag represents a lot of what technocracy is all about, freedom. Also, what do you mean when you say ditching america's founding principles. Technocracy is a science administration. No contracts or laws.
It is also widely recognized around the world, the flag. Also, include the fact that Technocracy originated in America and would probably be the only place where you can actually start a Technate(along with Canada) So, my guess is the flag stays the same. Interesting question StopTheMorons
Thanks for the comment, It may have seemed like I was dissing the Yin-Yang, but actually it is because I have a great deal of respect for the traditional origins (and cultural influences) of the symbol in its own right and the philosophy it represents.
Re: america's founding principles. Well, this is an oversimplification, but in short this country was founded primarily on the basis of Reason. Reason is more flexible than science. The best science uses Reason, but that does not mean science is Reason. Science looks for evidence--deals in evidences, but Reason weighs all things. In terms of necessary safeguards on our freedoms, scientific evidences are always subject to being weighed on the scale of Reason, but it doesn't work if reversed.
Also, from what I can see, technocracy would be more about efficiency of technique than it has to do with science, correct? Science is utilized--yes, but generally we are talking about who should drive the industrial (or work production) engine of the country. Right now that's dependent on a combination of 'private sector' business people and the socialists in government who feed off them. In other words people who get by on personality and aren't known for their engineering or technical skills.
Yes, right now, our stuff and systems is created for the purpose of profit. Not for the purpose of doing the job, or what is best for the system or that which it effects. The people in whatever field they are interesting in, whether it be waste disposal or communications, can decide how to best create a working system in a technocracy. So it's about the efficiency and sustainability of whatever needs to be done using science to help them decide.
@newb2yutube "a lot of what technocracy is all about [is] freedom."
One of the primary purposes of technocracy seems to be to prevent people from consuming very much of something that happens to be naturally cheap and abundant: energy. Besides being economically absurd, since it is fundamentally about arbitrary restriction, it doesn't seem to be all about freedom.
The price system is economically absurd. Yet you stick with it? Technocracy is not. It is about distributing an abundance at a sustainable level, which money cannot do. No planned obsolescence, shoddy goods, advertising for profit. The T.S.C. helps explain this. Have you read the book?
@newb2yutube "No planned obsolescence, shoddy goods, advertising for profit."
These things involve tradeoffs, and advertising can be censored. For example, cigarette advertising is censored apparently because of a perceived unfairness involved in the fact that it is addictive. Since children are easily manipulated, it might be reasonable to also censor advertising aimed at children -- especially, enticing ads promoting sugary breakfast cereals.
When we arbitrarily prevent "shoddiness" of goods, we waste resources. Trade-offs are important to consider. You should read this:
ejsd. org/public/journal_article/16
"Simon was among the first to criticize radical environmentalism for basing its conclusions only on arguments that neglected the logic of opportunity costs, trade-offs, and feasibility. In doing that, he inaugurated a tradition of responding to its proponents and their radical solutions with
"arguments regarding the costs and feasibility of those solutions and by pointing to the possible trade-offs. Cost-benefit, efficacy, efficiency, and effects-assessment become a part of the debate. In addition, a sound analysis takes into account not just . . . the obvious and immediate effects of an economic event, but also the indirect and long-run effects as well (Simon 1998, 681-83)."
"The T.S.C. helps explain this. Have you read the book?"
No. Technocracy's exponents and their religious tracts do not seem to be very sophisticated. Why would I read it? In other words, what problem is technocracy seeking to solve?
Have you read this book that explains why technocracy-like attempts to order society from the top down always end in poverty and grief?:
Who says? I see no reason for it to come to an end, or even why anyone should want to be so badly rid of it. And if replaced, replaced with what exactly? That I find suspect. Admittedly all forms of logo are "just symbolic", but if the symbols still carry valid or important meaning then I think that is a very big deal.
The technate design is a distributive accounting system using energy and resources as it's metrics. Only for the purpose of tracking sustainability and efficiency of our resource base. In a technate, you don't buy things, you use them. The cost in energy and or resources is calculated and recorded in order to know the next most probable in demand and the efficiency of the Technate. How far are you in your reading? Have you read the Technocracy Study Course?
I'm well aware of the sustainability aspect of Technocracy. I didn't mention that because there are better ways to attain that. As I said, I don't go all the way with Technocracy. I believe there should still be some form of market economy.
@silversoul7 I think that we could get rid of money if and only if all of our reasonable demand could be met with abundance, this includes labor automation. I don't honestly think that the advancement in automation is there yet because when we have the technology to implement robots for a job then the business owners usually do it to cut costs and increase profit. That's pretty much gospel in capitalism.
I suspect that the arising technocracy of the future will be constituted by a fusion of a comprehensive global industrial technocracy that will operate as a central coordinating body of the global industrial energy-resource infrastructure that maintains all of the requirements of urban living. Disemployment should be widespread in 20 years given the acceleration of ephemeralization. Within this infrastructure individuals will be able to exchange goods and services as they choose.
dollarability 1 year ago
I think some sort of technocracy seems inevitable in a technological age, but I would resent ditching America's founding principles or its flag in favor of Technocracy Inc's ugly-red colored yin-yang logo which seems have an air of communism about it. I'd rather that future generations have our flag to serve as an ultimate reminder of those who shed blood while fighting to be free. The more people recognize this, the less likely they will be manipulated by privileged and talented control freaks.
StopTheMorons 2 years ago
The yin-yang sign represents balance between production and consumption. I would think our flag would remain same if we were to become a technate. The American flag represents a lot of what technocracy is all about, freedom. Also, what do you mean when you say ditching america's founding principles. Technocracy is a science administration. No contracts or laws.
newb2yutube 2 years ago
It is also widely recognized around the world, the flag. Also, include the fact that Technocracy originated in America and would probably be the only place where you can actually start a Technate(along with Canada) So, my guess is the flag stays the same. Interesting question StopTheMorons
newb2yutube 2 years ago
Thanks for the comment, It may have seemed like I was dissing the Yin-Yang, but actually it is because I have a great deal of respect for the traditional origins (and cultural influences) of the symbol in its own right and the philosophy it represents.
StopTheMorons 2 years ago
Re: america's founding principles. Well, this is an oversimplification, but in short this country was founded primarily on the basis of Reason. Reason is more flexible than science. The best science uses Reason, but that does not mean science is Reason. Science looks for evidence--deals in evidences, but Reason weighs all things. In terms of necessary safeguards on our freedoms, scientific evidences are always subject to being weighed on the scale of Reason, but it doesn't work if reversed.
StopTheMorons 2 years ago
Also, from what I can see, technocracy would be more about efficiency of technique than it has to do with science, correct? Science is utilized--yes, but generally we are talking about who should drive the industrial (or work production) engine of the country. Right now that's dependent on a combination of 'private sector' business people and the socialists in government who feed off them. In other words people who get by on personality and aren't known for their engineering or technical skills.
StopTheMorons 2 years ago
Yes, right now, our stuff and systems is created for the purpose of profit. Not for the purpose of doing the job, or what is best for the system or that which it effects. The people in whatever field they are interesting in, whether it be waste disposal or communications, can decide how to best create a working system in a technocracy. So it's about the efficiency and sustainability of whatever needs to be done using science to help them decide.
newb2yutube 2 years ago
@newb2yutube "a lot of what technocracy is all about [is] freedom."
One of the primary purposes of technocracy seems to be to prevent people from consuming very much of something that happens to be naturally cheap and abundant: energy. Besides being economically absurd, since it is fundamentally about arbitrary restriction, it doesn't seem to be all about freedom.
hitssquad 1 year ago
@hitssquad Funny.
The price system is economically absurd. Yet you stick with it? Technocracy is not. It is about distributing an abundance at a sustainable level, which money cannot do. No planned obsolescence, shoddy goods, advertising for profit. The T.S.C. helps explain this. Have you read the book?
newb2yutube 1 year ago 4
@newb2yutube "No planned obsolescence, shoddy goods, advertising for profit."
These things involve tradeoffs, and advertising can be censored. For example, cigarette advertising is censored apparently because of a perceived unfairness involved in the fact that it is addictive. Since children are easily manipulated, it might be reasonable to also censor advertising aimed at children -- especially, enticing ads promoting sugary breakfast cereals.
hitssquad 1 year ago
@newb "No [...] shoddy goods"
When we arbitrarily prevent "shoddiness" of goods, we waste resources. Trade-offs are important to consider. You should read this:
ejsd. org/public/journal_article/16
"Simon was among the first to criticize radical environmentalism for basing its conclusions only on arguments that neglected the logic of opportunity costs, trade-offs, and feasibility. In doing that, he inaugurated a tradition of responding to its proponents and their radical solutions with
hitssquad 1 year ago
"arguments regarding the costs and feasibility of those solutions and by pointing to the possible trade-offs. Cost-benefit, efficacy, efficiency, and effects-assessment become a part of the debate. In addition, a sound analysis takes into account not just . . . the obvious and immediate effects of an economic event, but also the indirect and long-run effects as well (Simon 1998, 681-83)."
hitssquad 1 year ago
@newb "The price system is economically absurd."
Please explain.
"The T.S.C. helps explain this. Have you read the book?"
No. Technocracy's exponents and their religious tracts do not seem to be very sophisticated. Why would I read it? In other words, what problem is technocracy seeking to solve?
Have you read this book that explains why technocracy-like attempts to order society from the top down always end in poverty and grief?:
juliansimon. com/writings/Ultimate_Resource
hitssquad 1 year ago
The flag will be replaced or come to an end eventually, so what's the big deal?
vman456 2 years ago
Who says? I see no reason for it to come to an end, or even why anyone should want to be so badly rid of it. And if replaced, replaced with what exactly? That I find suspect. Admittedly all forms of logo are "just symbolic", but if the symbols still carry valid or important meaning then I think that is a very big deal.
StopTheMorons 2 years ago
The technate design is a distributive accounting system using energy and resources as it's metrics. Only for the purpose of tracking sustainability and efficiency of our resource base. In a technate, you don't buy things, you use them. The cost in energy and or resources is calculated and recorded in order to know the next most probable in demand and the efficiency of the Technate. How far are you in your reading? Have you read the Technocracy Study Course?
newb2yutube 2 years ago
Its not a money system. It is not 'energy credits'. It is an accounting system only.
Do some more reading off Wikipedia.
Also you miss pretty much all of the larger points of why a technate is a good future... sustainability within the resource base. Ha ha.
Keep reading.
Thanks.
TBonePickensetc 2 years ago 5
I'm well aware of the sustainability aspect of Technocracy. I didn't mention that because there are better ways to attain that. As I said, I don't go all the way with Technocracy. I believe there should still be some form of market economy.
silversoul7 2 years ago
That being the case then you endorse the current class/caste system and contract law society.
A market economy is one that distributes goods and services. A technate does that.
Assuming you are a progressive liberal or libertarian in your thinking... neither of which is connected to ideas about a technate.
Have a great day.
TBonePickensetc 2 years ago
@silversoul7 I think that we could get rid of money if and only if all of our reasonable demand could be met with abundance, this includes labor automation. I don't honestly think that the advancement in automation is there yet because when we have the technology to implement robots for a job then the business owners usually do it to cut costs and increase profit. That's pretty much gospel in capitalism.
MacabreManifesto 11 months ago