Sorry if this isn’t fully relevant, but no where else to ask it.

So I’ve ran into some technocrats a few times who proudly proclaim the achievements of technocracy. Naturally, the ideology seems opposed to communism, which suggests it is a bourgeois ideology.

What is technocracy, is it good or bad, and what are the best arguments to refute it?

  • @WTOS
    link
    2
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    It’s fine. One thing to note is that technocracy’s flaws can only be found in capitalist nations, but never attributed, and hand-waved as an inherent flaw in design, whereas its successes can only be found in AES, but always de-fanged from its clear ideological / political perspective.

    The Good:

    • policy based on expertise / merit
    • cool trains and nice city planning
    • that’s about it.
    • China. USSR.

    The Bad 1:

    • Even highly educated / trained people can make mistakes.

    The Bad 2: Only Happens Under Capitalism But People Make Mistakes Guys Please Edition:

    • Tuskegee (racist, exploitative, common denominator of capitalism)
    • History of eugenics and scientific racism (racist, exploitative, common denominator of capitalism)
    • Wall St. economists (exploitative, common denominator of capitalism)
    • Military actions (racist, imperialistic, common denominator of capitalism)
    • “China will collapse by the year 1999, 2000, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2016, 2020 because of ghost cities, inflation, debt, COVID” - that dude who keeps shilling his book

    *** There’s more to it obviously, and I remember there being a couple of lectures / papers that seriously discussed the potential flaws in technocracy wrt bureaucracy, lags in policy and differences in opinion (e.g., doctors’ vs economists’ opinions on healthcare), but it’s all sorta meh to me? I don’t see it happening in a socialist state tbh. I can try and dig those back up if I can find them.