10 Minutes on Technocracy

Alexander Duncan argues that only a new international political movement based on technocracy has the capacity to guide us into the human civilization of the future. Go to my blog to read the full text: http://an2045.blogspot.com/

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• politics
• international
• internationalism
• technocracy
• future
• futurism
• socialism
• capitalism
• economics
• technology
• globalism
• globalization
• planetarization

[angrybosnian]

i want to be technocrat/Technocracy but what exactly is it i need a simple answer oh and does it use religion and if that was the form of goverment in america how badly would my life style change and would my life be better or worse or same. ps im in middel class

[dollarability]

@angrybosnian I only have 486 characters but briefly technocracy is government by scientists, engineers and experts based on the principles of scientific decision making and design. Technocracy has no relation to religion at all. Technocrats believe that technocracy would result in a huge increase in the quality of life for everyone. But it has to be done right to avoid an authoritarian bureaucracy which is why we need a movement. Look at Zeitgiest, Venus Project, NET, and Technocracy Inc.

[dollarability]

I wrote a blog on this topic. Its located on my blog at An 2045 at Blogspot under January 2011 (system wont let me post a URL). 

[SonOfNye]

This seems like the surest way to achieve a Type 1 civilization.

[vain911]

what is your thoughts on the Z movement or the Venus project?

[dollarability]

@TBonePickensetc According to the introduction to Life in a Technocracy, by Howard Segal, p. xii, Technocracy, Inc. did not invent the term technocracy: "The fledgling movement reluctantly acknowledged that the term "Technocracy" was not new but dated back at least to 1882." Therefore, no group can claim exclusive rights with regard to the exact definition. Technocracy is a broad idea that is capable of multiple interpretations.

[MagnitudePerson]

@dollarability Wait. Are you a member on the RevLeft forums? Do you not identify yourself as an A.C.T'er? And yes, a anarcho-synicalist society wouldn't survive alone, this is why it dosent work in one country but that dosent mean it works at all?

[dollarability]

@MagnitudePerson It's hard to converse in this small space. The reason I am a singulatarian technocrat is because of the inability of all historical Leftists ideologies, Marxism and anarchsim included, to actually describe the new order of society and show how it would work. Anarchism (or anarcho-syndicalism) would lead to a stagnant, localist, rural-agrarian communitarian collectivism before it is invaded by a more militant neighbour. I dont believe in any of the old revolutionary schemes.

[MagnitudePerson]

@dollarability I dontk now what you mean by "Armed Forces" but Anarchy DOES NOT MEAN "Chaos" read on Petter Kroptkin, Proudhon, Bakunin. C.N.T F.A.I in Spain were anarchist. Social Anarchism is a subidealogy to commuinsm, like trotskyism, marxist-leninism, etc.

I think you misunderstod mos of what you read, i recommend you to ask your questions on RevLeft, especially the users like CUlt of reason, Noxioun, Technocrat, and others there.

[dollarability]

@MagnitudePerson I found an introduction to ACT online and will read it thoroughly. My first impression is that the article is paradoxical: organized anarchy is a contradiction in terms, unless every aspect of association is voluntary. Since my vision of technocracy does not include any participation by the technocracy in any social functions, this is exactly what will occur. I also disagree that the technocracy should be involved in Armed Forces. There should be no Armed Forces.