The Neotechnocracy Movement

a society rather than crude failed ideology and profit motive of today's systems. "Emancipation Through Technology!"





New Libertarian Technocracy Defined

The use of the two terms “Libertarian” and “Technocracy” has often been a source of confusion, especially among proponents of the traditional understanding of these two distinctive and very much separate philosophies. This is because in truth we are neither. Rather, we have borrowed the terms from existing ideologies and incorporated many of the key elements of each. At a surface glance we have embraced many of the essentials of each, but when one investigates deeper into these two ideals it becomes rapidly apparent how greatly we have diverged from both. Our understanding of the term “libertarian” differs from the classical understanding of the ethos that has long been espoused by thinkers such as Rand, von Mises, Hayek, etc who argued that an amplified version of the Smithian concepts of laize-faire economics is essential for the progression of civilization and more importantly for the preservation and proper acknowledgement of the rights of the individual. It was only through the unadulterated pursuit of individual self-interest that people would truly be free. Though their ultra-capitalist sentiments are a certain path towards corporate despotism, their adamant opposition to state authority, militarism, and infringement on the freedoms of the individual is what is admirable. Often the term libertarian has been employed by thinkers who do not acknowledge the libertarian political ideology and rather use the term to denote a polar opposition to authoritarianism. In many instances the term has been used to describe a variety of differing ethos. For example, the anarcho-syndicalist movements which enjoyed widespread popularity in the early to mid 1900’s often were described as “libertarian-communism”. To say the least this was not out of a love for the principles which defined the “libertarian” movement which thrived as it’s contemporary but rather by its firm opposition to the authoritarian practices which were commonplace in all communist powers and movements of the time. The key principle with this usage of libertarianism is the reverence for the rights and freedoms of the individual with the distain for coercive practices and sentiments of authoritarians. It is this more relaxed application of the term which we have adopted to denote our opposition to tyranny and our dedication to the protection of liberty and human dignity. Similarly, our adaption of the term “technocratic” has been derived from an understanding of the word which has departed from its original philosophic parameters. Technocracy can, at its base level, be defined as system of political governance based upon the employment of the scientific method in solving social issues where the role of governance would be assigned based upon one’s degree of expertise within a field. In this system the scientists, the engineers, and the academicians would replace the standard political castes and merit would be the deciding factor in a statesperson. This idea was expanded greatly upon by Howard Scott with his Technocracy Movement in the United States during the 1930’s. In his proposed system, similar methods of preferentialism would be employed in appointed leadership with a use of the scientific method in mentioned ways. His system proposed a utilization of a post-price or post-scarcity based economic system to replace the current model. Resources would be managed through state ownership based upon sustainability rather than profiteering to ensure that social infrastructure remained intact indefinitely. His system however offered a highly clinical attitude towards politics by maintaining that moral mechanisms, philosophic principles, and political values and opinions would be discarded in favour of a purely objective rationality dictated by scientific management. As with libertarianism, Libertarian Technocracy utilizes the notions of scientific and academic preferentialism in selecting leaders and the application of the scientific method in addressing social concerns along with the strive for sustainable economic management however our attitudes towards individual rights differ greatly. We have estimated that the employment of either of these two parent ethos in their puritan forms would have disastrous consequences for all. The unrestrained application of scientific method would result in tyranny and frequent coercion. The absence of public political opinion and the reverence for what could be described as “arbitrary” philosophic values such as liberty and self-determination would leave an absence of ethics when leading a society. Without an intrinsic philosophic value placed upon the individual the person soon becomes objectified and becomes a tool to utilize without regard. Similarly, a world driven by self-interest or more appropriately profiteering without the restraint of regulations would spiral into an aggressive state of unending competition that would resemble the Hobbesian description of life before society a state of “war of all against all” where life is “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short.” By introducing what we view as the positive elements of libertarianism into the technocratic philosophy we can counteract the negative features existing in both ideologies while promoting their positive ideals. In essence, the Libertarian Technocratic state would be run by the scientists, engineers, and technicians and seek a pragmatic economic policy of sustainability while tackling the social issues of the time using the scientific method and empirical evidence in their legislative policy within the constraints of constitutionally entrenched rights held at a standard much higher than any of today’s liberal democracies, the use of coercion they would be able to implement is limited to unavoidable necessity and is backed with proportional compensation for any and all grievances incurred. Thus the logic of the merger of the two terms Libertarian and Technocracy. Our movement can better be defined by our own unique input into the arena of political thought, the prioritization of scientific exploration and discovery and technological advancement. We firmly believe that the key to true enjoyment of civil rights and the emancipation of humanity from the destructive socialist and capitalist economic systems such as the tragedies of poverty, starvation, and overpopulation rests in technology. We hold to the ideal elements of our parent ideologies and have incorporated them into something entirely new. Perhaps the time will come soon were a new and unique term is coined which better describes our movement, until that time arrives we feel it is best to operate under joined philosophic concepts which our ethos is based upon.