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

51–60 of 148 posts

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#51

Post by asdff »

simianwords wrote: post #41
asdff wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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?

I literally told you that it was technology - agricultural revolution in this case. This made people specialised so that they dind't have to waste time slogging for food which freed their mind up for other mental activities.

Hunter gatherer tribes also have religion, culture, and economics, and ideas.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#52

Post by tootie »

codejake wrote: post #30

Commenters here are getting confused. There's technocracy, the governance[1]. And Technocracy, the pseudo-cult movement[2]. They quickly evolved into different things with different ideologies. The article is mostly about the latter movement. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement

Futurism is the same. It's an appealing concept but the actual Futurist movement was basically just fascist.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#53

Post by simianwords »

logicchains wrote: post #49
simianwords wrote: post #20

One thing is for sure, whether you like it or not countries that adopt policies that promote tech will outcompete and destroy other countries (metaphorically). You can’t do anything but watch technology take over. It doesn’t care about what you want or prefer.

Not necessarily, it's possible that a country that goes too fast with human augmentation will end up accidentally sterilizing the majority of its population, causing it to fall behind. Like the Asgard in Stargate, who accidentally sterilized themselves through excessive use of cloning.

Sure this is the exception to prove my rule

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#54

Post by simianwords »

asdff wrote: post #51
simianwords wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally told you that it was technology - agricultural revolution in this case. This made people specialised so that they dind't have to waste time slogging for food which freed their mind up for other mental activities.

Hunter gatherer tribes also have religion, culture, and economics, and ideas.

they have shitty versions of all of them

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#55

Post by Snow_Falls »

hellojimbo wrote: post #50
engineer_22 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh neat they're still accepting applications.

thank you for your helpful snark, the commentor couldnt have been asking just out of curiosity because he's evil

You may want to read the usernames again, they were replying to themselves.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#56

Post by Snow_Falls »

simianwords wrote: post #54
asdff wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hunter gatherer tribes also have religion, culture, and economics, and ideas.

they have shitty versions of all of them

I recommend reading "The Dawn of Everything" by David Graeber & David Wengrow. You might learn something about those "shitty" versions.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#57

Post by simianwords »

Snow_Falls wrote: post #56
simianwords wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

they have shitty versions of all of them

I recommend reading "The Dawn of Everything" by David Graeber & David Wengrow. You might learn something about those "shitty" versions.

your revealed preference would tell a bit more about this than any book. keep me updated on whether you would like to live in a tribal society's culture or a modern one.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#58

Post by econ »

tovej wrote: post #42
rootusrootus wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?

Did you read tfa? The key word here is populism. Finding scapegoats (immigrants, woke feminists, lazy unemployed people) to explain away societal ills caused by inequality. Of course tech billionaires prefer blaming the scapegoats to blaming themselves. It serves as a political shield, so that they can continue to hoard wealth and control. In the 30s, industry leaders aligned themselves with Hitler and Mussolini. The…

You can eat olives without martini.

The actual problem with technocracy (if done right) is that the work of experts grows increasingly incomprehensible to average men. Even if things work out perfectly, experts can't properly take risks or make a leap of faith in other people's name. (Not to argue our current democratic model is any good at it)

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#59

Post by intalentive »

trhway wrote: post #36
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 fail…

Seems to be working fine in China. Bad management happens, and does not refute the idea of management itself. Good management works.

Re: The Technocracy Movement of the 1930s

#60

Post by tovej »

econ wrote: post #58
tovej wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read tfa? The key word here is populism. Finding scapegoats (immigrants, woke feminists, lazy unemployed people) to explain away societal ills caused by inequality. Of course tech billionaires prefer blaming the scapegoats to blaming themselves. It serves as a political shield, so that they can continue to hoard wealth and control. In the 30s, industry leaders aligned themselves with Hitler and Mussolini. The…

You can eat olives without martini. The actual problem with technocracy (if done right) is that the work of experts grows increasingly incomprehensible to average men. Even if things work out perfectly, experts can't properly take risks or make a leap of faith in other people's name. (Not to argue our current democratic model is any good at it)

The actual problem with technocracy is that you create a formalized hierarchy of leaders and rabble based on some credential granting authority that the technocrats control.

That's a recipe for disaster. The technocrats define who can be a technocrat, and can design the process to benefit them. The incentives are towards elitist, racist, cronyist policies that would select for sociopathic tendencies.

What's the difference between a technocrat and a bishop in this case?

Post reply on HN