| Technocracy |
|Founder(s)||Nicholas Murray Butler, M. King Hubbert, Howard Scott, Julian Huxley|
|Interest of||• "Smart city"|
• Parag Khanna
• Patrick Wood
“A Technocracy is a resource-based economic system that uses energy as its accounting system.
This is in contrast to our current economic system which is price-based (i.e., supply and demand) and uses money as its accounting system. In a resource-based economic system, all resource inputs required for human subsistence would be carefully measured and meted out in the most efficient manner in order to eliminate wastage. All consumption would be automatically limited by issuing to all citizen a quota of energy certificates. These certificates could be spent on goods and services priced according to the energy that it took to make them in the first place. This, they reasoned, would create a Utopia-like society where people would only work 20 hours per week and yet still have abundance of material goods available for consumption.
In official narrative Technocracy is a form of government see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy however you can also find the real origins of technocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy_movement. In the second paragraph we read: "The movement was committed to abstaining from all partisan politics and communist revolution".
"[Nicholas Murray Butler, President of Columbia University in New York] announced in early fall 1932 that Columbia University was backing a brand new economic system being designed by scientists and engineers that could replace Capitalism and Free Enterprise and quite literally rescue the whole world. Since politicians and economists had already failed, why not give the scientists and engineers a shot at it? Even more compelling was the name of this new economic system: Technocracy.
Well, this was news and the Hearst syndicate wasted no time in jumping on it. Here was a unique story of something truly new that could restore hope to a hopelessly lost and dying economic system. And most importantly, delivering a hopeful message would certainly build readership and, in fact, it did! The presses ran hot all over America, cranking out story after story on the coming miracle age of the scientific society, if only the scientists and engineers could work out all the details. Many Americans swooned, cheered and then bought even more newspapers and magazines to stay up with the latest developments.
While it was true that Hearst had lowered his principles to support anything coming out of Columbia University, his concerns might have been assuaged when he discovered that the Technocrats, those scientific and engineering saviors, were also pointedly anti-Communist. In fact, an implicit side-benefit of Technocracy would be to permanently erase Communism from America which undoubtedly helped Hearst’s decision to get behind it.
Throughout the fall and winter of 1932, Hearst and Butler were seemingly on the same page. However, neither of them realized that they were being conned by the messianic leader of the Technocracy group, Howard Scott. Scott relished the attention he received at Columbia, and he loved to give interviews to any reporter who would listen, most of whom were employed by Hearst newspapers. The bubble suddenly popped when it was discovered that Scott did not have the engineering degree that he claimed to have; in other words, he had pointedly defrauded both Butler and Hearst and to say that they were both livid is an understatement.
Damage control was immediate. Reputation-sensitive Butler, who had put Columbia up to be the laughing stock of global academia, summarily dropkicked the entire Technocracy group off the Columbia campus. Hearst was no less dramatic, for the purveyor of fake news had been caught at his own game. The guillotine fell swiftly on every Hearst publication in America: Don’t ever mention the word ‘Technocracy” again or you will be fired. Not surprisingly, no more stories on Technocracy appeared in Hearst publications.
This could have been the end of Technocracy, but it wasn’t.
Finally, in early 1934, [Howard] Scott and Hubbert filed articles of incorporation for Technocracy, Inc. in New York state and created a membership organization
that would require annual dues to provide operating funds. From this time forward, Technocracy as an economic ideology was fleshed out by Technocracy, Inc., and mostly by M. King Hubbert"
- 'Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order' (2018) by Patrick M Wood p.15-17
Extensive details of the mechanics, details and rationale of Technocracy can be found in the Technocracy Study Course and in this author’s book, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation. In the interest of space, I will list a few of the more salient features in this section. The official requirements for Technocracy are seen on page 232 of the Study Course and were considered necessary for normal operation of the Technate:
- 1. Register on a continuous 24 hour-per-day basis the total net conversion of energy.
- 2. By means of the registration of energy converted and consumed, make possible a balanced load.
- 3. Provide a continuous inventory of all production and consumption.
- 4. Provide a specific registration of the type, kind, etc., of all goods and services, where produced and where used.
- 5. Provide specific registration of the consumption of each individual, plus a record and description of the individual.
- 6. Allow the citizen the widest latitude of choice in consuming his individual share of Continental physical wealth.
- 7. Distribute goods and services to every member of the population. (Wood, Technocracy Rising: The Trojan Horse of Global Transformation, (Coherent Publishing, 2015))
In items 1 and 2, you can see the focus on control over energy distribution and consumption. Items 3-5 cover the extensive collection of data that would be used to monitor and control the societal machinery. Item 6 indicates that citizens could buy anything they wanted, limited only by the number of Energy Certificates that were issued at the beginning of the accounting period. Item 7 points out that every single member of society would be in the system, with no possibility of holdouts. Other key points to the original definition of Technocracy include,
- Private property would be eradicated altogether. Everything would be owned in common by the Technate and controlled by them.
- All price-based currencies would be abolished and replaced by a system of Energy Certificates.
- Energy Certificates would be issued at the start of an accounting period, and expired at the end of it, preventing accumulation of savings for future needs.
- All conceivable human needs (food, housing, transportation, medical, retirement, etc.) would be met by the Technate at their sole discretion.
- Traditional systems of government would be abolished, including Congress and state governments.
- A continental board of Technocrats would manage all economic and societal affairs according to Functional and Service Sequences, defined by and run by themselves.
- Education would be transformed into human conditioning to prepare students for a lifetime of work chosen for them by the Technate.
- Science and the Scientific Method would be the sole guide to decisionmaking throughout the Technate, based on collected data.
-Technocracy: The Hard Road to World Order' (2018) by Patrick M Wood p.19-21
|"Smart city"||A prison-city with an algorithm as warden|
|Agenda 2030||A UN plan to achieve what they term "sustainable development" by 2030.|
|Giuseppe Conte||Former Italian Prime Minister|
|Bill Gates||“The closer you get to [government] and see how the sausage is made, the more you go, oh my God! These guys don’t even actually know the budget. . . . The idea that all these people are going to vote and have an opinion about subjects that are increasingly complex — where what seems, you might think . . . the easy answer [is] not the real answer. It’s a very interesting problem. Do democracies faced with these current problems do these things well?”||Bill Gates||2013|
|Graeme Maxton||“If today’s political leaders are unable to do what is needed, then the options become harder still. Either nothing happens, and climate change becomes unstoppable, ruining the lives of billions, or the existing political leadership will need to be replaced, either through the electoral process or in some less democratic way. One alternative would be for a technocratic government to be appointed to do what is needed, to force an economic transition, and then step down when the job is done. But this assumes that humanity can develop the mechanisms to make such an exceptional change in governance happen, and that it possesses enough people of intellect and courage to manage the transition.”||Graeme Maxton||2021|
|This is a page stub. Please add to it.|