by Patrick Wood
 November 25, 2022
 extracted from 'The Evil Twins of Technocracy and Transhumanism'

 

 

 

 

 

 


Instead of answering off the bat, I want to first discuss technocracy's practitioners, who are referred to as "technocrats."

 

You may have already heard this term mentioned in the news or in your social circle.

 

Learning how to recognize a technocrat will help you understand technocracy much faster, because it's easier to understand people than it is an esoteric ideology.


The most thorough empirical study on technocracy was published in 1977 by Professor Robert Putnam from the University of Michigan.

 

Titled "Elite Transformation in Advanced Industrial Societies - An Empirical Assessment of the Theory of Technocracy," Putnam's paper presented his analysis based on approximately 100 interviews of high-ranking national civil servants from several nations in Europe.

"Data from this study," he wrote, "are particularly useful for assessing propositions about the technocratic mentality." 1

His interviews revealed six stereotypical personality traits, attitudes, and world views, all of which I have personally verified during my own fifteen-year study of technocracy and technocrats.

 

In other words, these observations are just as valid today as they were in 1977.
 

Putnam summarized:

  1. Above all, the technocrat believes that techies must replace politics and defines his own role in apolitical terms. He has great confidence in the possibility of solving the problems of society by a scientific approach. He is free from all political attachments.
     

  2. The technocrat is skeptical and even hostile toward politicians and political institutions. [...] [T]echnocrats are anti-political and anti- democratic.
     

  3. The technocrat is fundamentally unsympathetic to the openness and equality of political democracy. Convinced of his infallibility, the technocrat is a skilled hand at closed politics. [...] He tends toward authoritarianism and absolutism (the "technocratic dictatorship").
     

  4. The technocrat believes that social and political conflict is, at best, misguided and, at worst, contrived. The technician who believes that he has arrived at a full understanding of a question is always surprised and often grieved when he encounters opposition to his theories; inevitably, he is tempted to attribute this to ignorance or ill will.
     

  5. The technocrat rejects ideological or moralistic criteria, preferring to debate policy in practical, "pragmatic terms." He is a pragmatist, hostile to political ideologies. Technocrats treat ideological arguments with condescending indifference, sometimes with impatience and scorn.
     

  6. The technocrat is strongly committed to technological progress and material productivity; he is less concerned about distributive questions of social justice. In the technocratic mode, the ends have become simply efficiency and output. 2

Note that four of the six characteristics express hostility toward political systems and structures, toward politicians and political theory.

 

Modern technocrats have no use for politics and politicians unless they can use either or both to achieve their own agenda. Historic technocrats felt the same way, but they went a step further, thoroughly baking their anti-politics into the ideology of technocracy.


When technocracy was originally codified at Columbia University in 1932, America was suffering the heat of the Great Depression. History does not remember Henry A. Porter, an early technocrat who wrote the 1932 book "Roosevelt and Technocracy."

 

Incidentally, though Porter claimed on the introductory page that he was a "Nationally known Economist and Financial Analyst," I could find no significant historical accolade to him other than in his book, which I personally acquired from a rare book store.

 

Porter's biggest concern was whether Franklin D. Roosevelt would be elected and would turn his proposed New Deal into a technocracy.

 

Thus, he closes the book with a forceful admonition:

That we shall have to pass through a period of chaos is inevitable.

 

The extent and severity of such a period is wholly within control of the people. Radical and immediate changes in both our political and economic systems will be necessary.

 

This can best be accomplished by vesting supreme and emergency power in some one man who has the confidence and respect of a majority of the American people.

 

That man is FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT - to whom should be given dictatorial powers in the approaching crisis. 3

Needless to say, Roosevelt didn't take Porter's challenge. And no wonder: The new President would have been thrown under the bus before the end of his first year in office.

 

Why? Because he was a politician, not a technocrat!


In his book, Porter was certainly schmoozing Roosevelt, but, to his own detriment, he allowed the radical nature of technocracy to leak from its pages.

 

In his conclusion he wrote,

In any national crisis, individualism must be submerged; we must all unite on a basis of equality.

 

Surely we are not too hidebound to move forward courageously to an effective and unconventional reconstruction of our wealth and resources. 4

This language sounds suspiciously similar to the recent call by the World Economic Forum for a "Great Reset" of the global economic system, in which "you will own nothing and be happy" if only you submerge your individuality for the greater good.

 

No thanks...!

Porter believed so strongly that technocracy could deliver the world from its Great Depression ills that he laid on the propaganda with religious zeal:

The gospel of Technocracy is spreading through our schools, universities and churches.

 

Wall Street is exhibiting an intense but worried interest, and it is whispered [that] even the Vatican is closely following the progress of this new brain-child of our engineer-scientists. 5

 

Technocracy a "gospel"?

 

Even the Vatican follows it? 6

 

It must be divine, right?

But oh, how Porter and his technocrat cronies hated politicians. They were certain that technocracy would prevail over politics.

 

Even if success were slow, they had an excuse at the ready:

"It is plain that its coming will be delayed by political maneuvering and financial chicanery."

Why, you ask, am I making such a big deal about technocracy and technocrats, politics and politicians?

 

Because we must establish, from the start, that modern technocrats are currently in an all-out world war with nation-states - specifically with their political structures and with all the people who run the structures.


It was technocrats and not politicians who, in 2020, launched a global health emergency based on what is now recognized as a scientifically engineered virus called SARS-Cov-2.

 

It was technocrats and not politicians who created the policies for PCR testing, universal masking, and social distancing; for shutting down schools and for locking down cities, provinces, states, and countries.

 

It was technocrats and not politicians who railroaded the scientific solution of mRNA-based injections that meddle with human genetics and the immune system.


It was technocrat Dr. Anthony Fauci who stood confidently, with arms crossed and nose lifted high, behind President Donald Trump then behind President Joe Biden, and who, with a nod from each chief executive, orchestrated nationwide emergency measures despite cries of anguish from citizens throughout the U.S.

 

This same scenario played out all around the world, in nation after nation.

 

Who was in charge:

technocrats or politicians...?

Because this is a global war, national or sub-national blame must be laid aside.

 

In other words,

you can't blame Republicans, Democrats, or any other political body in the world...

 

Technocracy in the 1930s was run by scientists and engineers.

 

Technocracy in the 21st century continues to be run by scientists and engineers.

Technocrats of any era possess all the personality traits Putnam enumerated above.
 

The bottom line here is that,

the future world will not be run by politicians or other representatives of the people.

 

Every Parliament, Congress and Assembly will ultimately be disbanded or neutered so that technocrats can administer a scientific dictatorship, in which everything and everyone is controlled directly by them...

 

 

 

Footnotes

  1. Putnam, Robert. "Elite Transformation in Advanced Industrial Societies." Comparative Political Studies 10. 1977. Pages 285–387.

  2. Putnam. Pages 285–387.

  3. Porter, Henry A. Roosevelt and Technocracy. (Los Angeles: Wetzel Publishing Company, Inc. 1932). Page 72.

  4. Porter. Page 72.

  5. Porter. Page 72.

  6. Note: Today, the Vatican and Pope Francis are openly and forcefully supporting sustainable development, green economy, natural capitalism, the Great Reset, etc., all of which are equivalent to historic "Technocracy" (the "T" was capitalized for many years, based on the name of the non-profit organization "Technocracy, Inc.," which was founded in 1933).