Technocracy è un movimento sociale e politico nato negli USA negli anni '20 e '30 del secolo scorso per sostenere l'idea di una società fondata sulla scienza e la tecnologia, in cui il benessere della società è ottimizzato dall'uso della scienza (anche e soprattutto come metodo) e della tecnologia. Sopravvive tutt'oggi con il nome di "Technocracy, Inc.".
L'idea alla base del Technocracy Movement - Movimento per la Tecnocrazia - nasce intorno alla fine del XIX secolo, dall'idea di alcuni sociologi ed economisti - tra i quali Thorstein Vleben e John Commons - di una "gestione scientifica" dell'economia, basata sulla sua visione dell'economia come fenomeno socialmente, non individualmente determinato. Su queste basi, dopo la fine della prima guerra mondiale si formano le prime organizzazioni tecnocratiche, che finiscono per confluire tutte nella "Technical Alliance", vero e proprio "Think Tank" di scienziati e tecnici. Dopo aver pubblicato un rapporto sull'uso dell'energia nell'america del nord, il gruppo si scioglie. Howard Scott, ex-membro della "Technical Alliance", fonda "Technocracy Incorporated" che, partendo dagli studi degli "economisti istituzionali" come Vleben e della "Technical Alliance", propone di applicare queste conoscenze alla società e alla politica. La depressione del '29 e le lezioni itineranti dell'organizzazione, le fecero avere un certo successo, proprio negli anni della depressione, e viste la premesse e i principi, non c'è assolutamente di che stupirsi:
"Non ci sono problemi insormontabili davanti al popolo americano. Possiamo avere la prosperità nello stesso momento in cui decidiamo di ottenerla. Non è necessario aspettare l'Europa un solo mese di più. Dimenticatevi le indennità tedesche. Non vi preoccupate di cosa la Lega delle Nazioni faccia o non faccia. Per quanto riguarda il Congresso, lasciatelo andare avanti a parlare; non è rilevante. Tutto ciò di cui abbiamo bisogno per raggiungere la prosperità è una ricchezza naturale sufficiente, capacità sufficienti, equipaggiamento industriale sufficiente, sufficiente forza lavoro e una guida razionale. Abbiamo tutto quello che ci serve, eccetto l'ultima, e non c'è ragione plausibile perchè noi non la si possa avere non appena i "tecnici" decidano di unirsi."
(Howard Scott, da un'intervista del 1921)
Howard Scott, Dal Hitchcock.
Basandosi sul rapporto della "Technical Alliance" i membri di "Technocracy Incorporated" osservano come l'occupazione industriale, raggiunto il suo apice nel 1919, è in continuo declino, nonostante la produzione industriale sia in continua crescita. Questa situazione porta a considerare un futuro ove la produzione industriale, sempre meno bisognosa di manodopera, avrebbe continuato a crescere fino a saturare un mercato incapace economicamente di assorbirla.
Ispirandosi ad un opera di Vleben, "The Engineers and the Price System", i "Tecnocrati" avanzano la loro proposta: privazione del controllo del sistema economico al mercato per consegnarlo nelle mani dei tecnici ("engineers"), vale a dire quello che si credeva stesse succedendo in Unione Sovietica. Nel periodo più buio della grande depressione, la proposta dei "Tecnocrati" sembrava la soluzione e la spiegazione - per di più scientifica - di tutto e per tutto. Nel 1933 i "Tecnocrati" rimbalzano da un giornale all'altro, fino al prestigioso Time Magazine. La diffusione del movimento era tale che in molte una città vennero aperte più sezioni, sezioni alle quali qualsiasi cittadino americano poteva iscriversi, tranne i politici.
Meno di un anno dopo, l'attenzione del pubblico americano aveva abbandonato i "Tecnocrati" per concentrarsi sul "New Deal" di Roosevelt. La "Technocracy Incorporated" è comunque in qualche modo sopravvissuta fino ad oggi, sotto la denominazione di "Technocracy, Inc.".
L'associazione e le sue teorie hanno avuto un breve ritorno di fiamma durante la crisi energetica in seguito alla guerra del Kippur.
17 comments:
Veblen had little to nothing to do with Technocracy and its concepts.
It is based on the works of Willard Gibbs. It is not based on Sociological nonsense.
Veblen died in the late 1920`s while the precedent document concerning Technocracy was written mostly by M. King Hubbert in 1934.
It appears that you have pressed the Wiki button and now think you know something.
I suggest you look around more and get better information than you posted.
It apperars you should read more carefully, or learn better Italian. The assumption that Thorsten Veblen has something to do with Technocracy, Inc. cannot be found in my post. It is true, anyway that the ideas behind Technocracy, Inc. find their roots back in the "scientific management" of economy. But these roots can be also tracked back to August Comte.
This was intended as a brief introductory chapter of a wider thought about a technocratic libertarianism.
You should not underestimate Wikipedia, it is full of external references and useful original sources.
Anyway, I think your analysys misses any reference to Henry Gantt and Howard Scott.
Wikipedia is mostly for people that are too lazy minded to think.
Sometimes it is good, often it is controlled by cabals.
The roots of Technocracy are not from the sources you mention... far from it.
Again please do not dumb things down with your 'opinion'.
There is no such thing as Technocratic Libertarianism.
I suggest you read 'The History and Purpose of Technocracy - Howard Scott.
Libertarianism is mostly based on dumbed down political concepts, such as the theory of labor according to 18th. cent. economics like Adam Smith writings, and controlling people through a class/caste Price System.
So pardon me, but you are ignorant and also defending your ignorance which is just plain stupid.
If you love Wikipedia so much then check out Willard Gibbs. He is the intellectual forefather of Technocracy.
"L'idea alla base del Technocracy Movement - Movimento per la Tecnocrazia - nasce intorno alla fine del XIX secolo, dall'idea di alcuni sociologi ed economisti - tra i quali Thorstein Vleben e John Commons - di una "gestione scientifica" dell'economia, basata sulla sua visione dell'economia come fenomeno socialmente, non individualmente determinato."
"The assumption that Thosten Veblin has something to do with Techocracy Inc. cannot be found in my post"
Are you a special, idiot or an ordinary idiot ?
Apparently you cannot even read your own post ?
Wikipedia is full of link and external resources, is a good starting point.
There is no Libertarianism in Technocracy, and that's maybe the reason of its political bankruptcy. Technocracy is just another "scientific" political theory, just like socialism, and it followed the same fate into the archive of history just to become a sort of "horror show" or "statistical amusement" for the generations of historians to come.
On the other hand technology itself can support the libertarian idea of self government and widespread control of states and istitutions by the citizens, ultimately leading those states and istitutions to their lowest terms, finally leading liberty to its truly meaning as "unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. " (Thomas Jefferson, letter to Isaac Tiffany, 1819).
Libertarianism, as its roots in classical liberalism, is based upon the idea that persons, individuals and their natural right are the reason for governments and "social groups" to exist, not vice versa.
Adam Smith's "Inquiry Into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations" is a work about the so called "free market", and classical liberal principles are very, very far from "theory of labor" and "class/cast price system". Those are marxist nonsense. Your description of libetarianism and classical liberalism IS marxist nonsense.
Classical liberal theories can be found mainly in the writings of John Locke and Thomas Jefferson. Others like J. Stuart Mill and A. Rand and the so called "Austrian School" just added a few to Locke's and Jefferson's work.
Hints: John Locke, "Two Treatises of Government", book II; John Locke, "Concerning Human Understanding"; John Locke, "Letter Concerning Toleration"; "The Writings of Thomas Jefferson - Definitive Edition", Albert Ellery Bergh Editor, 1905. (Just as a start).
Regarding your mis-understanding of the sentence "L'idea alla base del Technocracy Movement [...] nasce intorno alla fine del XIX secolo, dall'idea di alcuni sociologi ed economisti, etc.", it is typical fault of those stupid machines like "BabelFish" or "Google Translator". I know Italian is somhow a rhetorical and baroque language, but this is the reason why you should avoid using automatic translator or, worst, tenth generation Italian-American as a guide.
Enjoy your life, liberty and property.
"There is no Libertarianism in Technocracy, and that's maybe the reason of its political bankruptcy. Technocracy is just another "scientific" political theory, just like socialism, and it followed the same fate into the archive of history just to become a sort of "horror show" or "statistical amusement" for the generations of historians to come."
I see you live on another planet where you must enter a cabal of 18th. century disinformation to land.
Thinking is not a function of pushing the wiki button.
Technocracy is NOT a political system.
But you would not know that since you don`t care to explore or investigate it.
"I see you live on another planet where you must enter a cabal of 18th. century disinformation to land."
The point is I am too grown-up to belive in socialist fairy tales. Unfortunately for your "disinformation" liberal democracy is the only method that works, maybe because in the (classical) liberal view, individuals are individuals, not comrades or production unit.
Technocracy IS a political system, a sort of Comte's style socialism with the exotic taste of engineers as leaders (that would be a catastrophe, indeed).
You should ask yourself why Technocracy, Inc. was so successful in the '30s, along with the Soviet Union model, and then faded away.
When you try to reach the answer, also ask yourself why (classical) liberalism is not only effective, but it is the very foundation of any democratic institution.
(Classical) liberalism is about freedom to speech, disinformation is for the clerical, the fascist and the communists (they LOVE it).
Still alive and kicking well after the 18th century. Some may say 930 A.D.
Politicians, local or national, are not chosen by the public on the basis of competence or knowledge but rather in terms of personality and promises. Likewise, heads of governmental departments are chosen not for competence, expertise or experience but for their personal ideology and for conformity to a particular "party" line and their willingness to play the game as directed.
They do not necessarily have to know anything at all about the functions and services they are to direct.
The Secretary of Labor does not necessarily have to be one who has ever been a worker. The Secretary of Education does not have to have been an educator.
The person selected to head the Department of Defense , which is basically a functionally technical realm, is chosen without regard for any knowledge he may have in military strategy, logistics, etc., since it is now primarily a money-management agency.
The important thing is that they are willing to "toe the line" in accord with the prevailing political and financial ideology.
You my friend are what we call brainwashed with abstract concepts such as 'democracy'.
Also you are completely clueless as to Technocracy Technate design.
It has nothing what so ever in common with your examples given.
It is also comical that you exalt Democracy. Democracy is special interest control using the mechanism of civil contract called voting.
It is a scam system run by soldiers of belief that are actually working for special interest groups.
I see you keep going around in circles much as a young dog chases its tail.
Before making pronouncements about things you know nothing about you really could do a little research.
Politicians should NOT be chosen on competence basis (for that there are advisors), their only competence should be political, becase they're asked to make political choices.
A factory should be managed on the basis of competence. A country is not a factory, and citizens are not employees. In Italy we had our share of "technical" governments, with non-politicians as ministers. They were competent, but they completely lack ANY political view. The outcome were disastrous.
The person selected as to head the ministry of defense, following your example, should be someone who knows very well the vision of his governement in interational relationship AND should have a good knowledge of international treaties and diplomacy. As a minister his choices in money managing must be dictated from a political view, instead of throwing away money putting them here and there, randomly.
You criticize democracy, well: libertarians and (classical) liberals criticize it too, because the principle of delegation, citizens are not in real full control of the government. A solution maybe found in technology, allowing every citizen to control directly non only the government, but the laws too, ultimately leading to a so-called "direct democracy", citizens in direct control of the political issues of their country.
What is the Technocracy, Inc. solution? Let's read:
"It is too hazardous in today’s highly integrated, technological society to depend on this random method for selecting the specialized type of personnel required. We need instead a selective technique that will have some better chance of ensuring that people with firsthand knowledge of the functions they are expected to administer will be selected. Such a technique exists in the vertical alignment procedure of promotion used by industry for selecting its supervisory staff in the technical departments."
(From technocracy.org, found via Wikipedia)
In other words "the world is too complicated and people are so dumb, so we will use industry promotion system (including corruption and nepotism?) to appoint a competent leader". What about the citizen? He has no control over the process AND the leaders. Criticism will be allowed or free speech will be deemed as "energetically inefficent"? Again, who is to check their competence? In which way? Sounds like the old good story of the wise shepard and his flock.
Now comes the best one:
"The Sequence Directors, heads of their respective sequences, would constitute the Continental Board; and this body would use the only ballot employed at any stage for selecting a chairman or Continental Director from their midst. "
Sounds like the bloody Vatican, huh?
This is good, also: "At lower levels of administration, offending individuals could be replaced with someone else by their immediate superior."
EXACTLY like the bloody Vatican...
Listen, son. I am sorry that your babelfish misguided you, I do not advocate soviet-style or technocratic teocracy. In this blog "techné" is intended for its original greek meaning of"τέχνη" that is different from "skill" or "technics".
Method, and use of knowledge ("επιστήμη") throug reason are the means to evolution of men. Politically, socially, biologically.
You are very welcome to think as you please, and to think that you will have a 'good' political democratic government someday, and that special interest groups (democracy) will run it using money (bribery).
Have you ever studied Athenian Democracy ?
"In other words "the world is too complicated and people are so dumb, so we will use industry promotion system (including corruption and nepotism?) to appoint a competent leader". What about the citizen? He has no control over the process AND the leaders. Criticism will be allowed or free speech will be deemed as "energetically inefficent"? Again, who is to check their competence? In which way? Sounds like the old good story of the wise shepard and his flock."
You are using some very silly rhetorical language here and making up your own ideas and language, none of which is connected to our program. Try reading one of my information sites for real information on Technocracy Technate concept.
Technocracy defined
The root of the word Technocracy and its meaning come from the word technique . The root of this word is the Greek, techne ("art","craft", or "skill"), which linguists have further traced to the Indo-European root, teks - ( to weave, or fabricate ). From the earliest times, technique has been distinguished from other modes of human action by its purposive, rational, step-by-step way of doing things.--- In the case of Technocracy, this means administration by science or fact, within the context of the program developed by the Technical Alliance.
Here we study Athenian Democracy in High Schools. Plus I'been studying for a long time the Icelandic democracy.
You should know better there is no such thing as "perfect system". Only tyranny claims itself as a "perfect system".
"making up your own ideas and language, none of which is connected to our program"
That is exacly what I found on Tecnocracy, Inc. website. Anyway, no one there (you neither) explains how citizens can control their leaders in a Technocracy system.
After just a few millenia of history Europeans have learned a lot about tyranny, and how benevolent and efficent is its mask.
"The root of this word is the Greek, techne ("art","craft", or "skill")"
Using english lemma "skill" to translate "τέχνη" is inaccurate and misleading, both in the litteral and philosofical sense. no surprise, then, that a few dictionaries use that word.
As examples: Xenophon identifies the art of government ("Βασιλική τέχνη") as the highest of virtues and "τέχναι". We are far from a mere "skill", aren't we?
Again, Plato in his "Gorgias", distinguishes "τέχνη" from "έμπειρία" ("experience", "skill"), mainly because it seeks the welfare of its object, like the phisician seeking the wellness of his patients. Again this takes the meaning of the word more far from skill. Plato, further in his works, develops the concept of "τέχνη" adding importance to reflective knowlwedge.
Aristotle in his "Nicomachean Ethics" explain us that "τέχνη" is a disposition that produces something by way of true reasoning. "Tέχνη" is *active*, *alive* if you wish. "Tέχνη" produces ends by the mean of reason. In other words it is *method*.
Stoics hold virtue itself as a "τέχνη" or, better, as THE "τέχνη".
Anyway, trying to explain those conceps to someone who defines libertarianism as "mostly based on dumbed down political concepts, such as the theory of labor according to 18th. cent. economics like Adam Smith writings, and controlling people through a class/caste Price System", would be only "Acharnement thérapeutique"...
Perhaps.
But...
Those whose minds become fixed on complicated theories and admiration of their own ideas loose the ability to deal with reality.
I am a fan of Aristotle and not a fan of Plato. Come here eventually and check out what we are going to do.
It is brand new so don`t expect any thing to be here for a few days.
Keep open minded I hope.
We could use your help when you understand the actual dynamic better. http://apolitics.org/
apolitics.org
This site is not running right now but will be soon.
I prefer Aristotle to Plato too, since I am a "fan" of Hannah Arendt; the quotation was intended as a hint.
Actually (classical) liberalism is one the simpliest poitical theory and comes from the mere observation of reality (John Locke being an "empiricist"). You can find an abstract of the principles of (classical) liberalism in the U. S. Declaration of Indipendence.
I will add the site you suggested to my Gmarks.
Thank you.
I write a comment when I like a article on a website or I
have something to add to the conversation. Usually it's a result of the passion displayed in the post I looked at. And after this article "Technocracy, Inc. - 1: Storia". I was actually excited enough to leave a leave a responsea response ;-) I actually do have 2 questions for you if you usually do not mind. Is it just me or does it look like some of the responses come across as if they are left by brain dead people? :-P And, if you are writing at additional places, I would like to follow you. Could you list the complete urls of your communal pages like your twitter feed, Facebook page or linkedin profile?
Take a look at my web page :: dramatics
This blog has been abandoned. Check grendelfromthemoor.blogspot.com, alas it's in italian language only
Post a Comment