Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

donotresearch.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 148 posts

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#31

Post by walleeee »

intalentive wrote: post #8

Technology did change the world, and technocrats did shape it. This was part of what Burnham called the "managerial revolution". In the 1930s the fascists, communists, and New Dealers all took the reins and governed their societies in new technocratic ways. It has never really changed ever since. The permanent war economy of the United States never ceased, the constant monetary tweaking by the Federal Reserve never c…

4) energy and materials scarcity and compounding ecological externalities

this of course affecting not only the Western regimes but technocratic rule everywhere

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#32

Post by canelonesdeverd »

simianwords wrote: post #29
kingofthehill98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peter Thiel is the definition of "rich people bad", he's the stereotype of the billionaire who wants to rule over the state because somehow he knows what's best for us. He's a lunatic.

Ok he’s bad but what has he got wrong? I think he was pretty good at predicting certain things and I find him at least a bit insightful. Without going into good vs bad

>what has he got wrong?

For starters, Greta Thunberg doesn't seem to be the antichrist.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#33

Post by kerblang »

rootusrootus wrote: post #7
tovej wrote: post #6

Expected to read about past and current connections between technocracy and fascism. Was not disappointed. Musk, Altman, Thiel, Ellison, Zuckerberg, Page, and the like are trying to implement technocracy. And that's something we should be resisting at every opportunity.

> Musk, Altman, Thiel, Ellison, Zuckerberg, Page, and the like are trying to implement technocracy Several people (maybe all, I do not know for sure) on that list are pretty hard core right wing populists, correct? Isn't that completely at odds with technocracy? Or are you thinking that they are just taking advantage of a populist movement but are themselves technocrats?

They are trumpist, because Trump is highly narcissistic and disgusted by _weakness_ in others. They are elitist Nietzschean social darwinists at heart and believe IQ should determine social status.

The populism stuff doesn't mean "We're protecting the little guy from elites who conspire against him." It means "We're protecting ourselves from other elites who conspire against us - but the little guy will still be better off with us as the authoritarian elite."

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#34

Post by [deleted] »

akomtu wrote: post #21
_bypa wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why optimize for efficiency though? Why not human flourishing or planetary health, whichever way you wish to define that? Efficiency sounds to me like an absolutely awful way to run any society as it's what turns individuals into disposable cogs of a machine that needs to be operated smoothly because, well, no obvious reason other than a fetish to see the machine run smoothly, no matter the human cost.

Technocracy, and the doctrine of materialism, sees humans as machines.

[deleted]

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#35

Post by asdff »

simianwords wrote: post #17

“Like religious millenarianism awaiting the Second Coming, tech elites believe technology alone will usher in a total and complete transformation of society.” This is the standard view amongst most social theorists and economists. (Of course it’s not technology alone but that’s the prerequisite). Without agriculture and the Industrial Revolution, say bye bye to your woke policies L G B T Q rights and feminism. Humans…

>Humans simply wont develop mentally while slogging in a farm or being hunter gatherers.

Uh what? How do you think they came up with systems of government, economics, and religion if you characterize them as basically cows on pasture?

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#36

Post by trhway »

intalentive wrote: post #8

Technology did change the world, and technocrats did shape it. This was part of what Burnham called the "managerial revolution". In the 1930s the fascists, communists, and New Dealers all took the reins and governed their societies in new technocratic ways. It has never really changed ever since. The permanent war economy of the United States never ceased, the constant monetary tweaking by the Federal Reserve never c…

> In the 1930s the fascists, communists, and New Dealers all took the reins and governed their societies in new technocratic ways. ... They are technological means by which to manage populations. As Yuval Harari puts it, the answer to "unnecessary people" is "drugs and computer games".

while "New Deal" have a lot of issues, note that 2 other approaches totally failed. At least for some time we considered them as failed ones. Unfortunately, a bit refreshed for some external appearance they start to be more and more popular again by populistically riding the issues of the "New Deal" approach while we all start to collectively forget why those 2 lost.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#37

Post by advael »

simianwords wrote: post #29
kingofthehill98 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peter Thiel is the definition of "rich people bad", he's the stereotype of the billionaire who wants to rule over the state because somehow he knows what's best for us. He's a lunatic.

Ok he’s bad but what has he got wrong? I think he was pretty good at predicting certain things and I find him at least a bit insightful. Without going into good vs bad

Can you name a prediction? Most of your claims in the prior paragraph are retroactive causal explanations of phenomena, "just so" stories per se. Most aspects of Thiel's apparent vision of the future that have come true did so through his direct involvement via money, power, and influence. I see no meaningful evidence of unusual predictive power demonstrated thus far by you or anything else I've heard about. I suppose you could take the line that having power and using it to impose your will on the world is prediction in a sense, but it's certainly an unusual usage of the word

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#38

Post by recursivecaveat »

Technocracy always struck me as weirdly incoherent? If you take the economy, probably the most studied of government policies, it is not 1 number. There are many questions about what priorities ought to be. There is no 'expert' answer for how many starving poor people are a worthy trade off for a GDP point. Even if there was, there is an economist branch that disagrees with any possible position you might take. The question of which experts to listen to almost entirely subsumes the question of what experts say. More than anything it's a branding strategy. "Putting me, a surveillance investor, in charge of international relations is clearly more rational and scientific than putting the other guy in charge."

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#39

Post by hackable_sand »

simianwords wrote: post #12
tovej wrote: post #6

Expected to read about past and current connections between technocracy and fascism. Was not disappointed. Musk, Altman, Thiel, Ellison, Zuckerberg, Page, and the like are trying to implement technocracy. And that's something we should be resisting at every opportunity.

“Rich people do something so we should reactively go against it” is not the slam dunk you think it is.

You should sit this one out.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#40

Post by asdff »

simianwords wrote: post #12
tovej wrote: post #6

Expected to read about past and current connections between technocracy and fascism. Was not disappointed. Musk, Altman, Thiel, Ellison, Zuckerberg, Page, and the like are trying to implement technocracy. And that's something we should be resisting at every opportunity.

“Rich people do something so we should reactively go against it” is not the slam dunk you think it is.

If you think those guys did anything you need to lay off their Koolaid.
Post reply on HN