Jump to content

Technocracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected fromTechnocratic)
This article is about the form of government. For other uses, seeTechnocracy (disambiguation).
Part of thePolitics series
Basic forms ofgovernment

List of forms of government

List of countries by system of government
Source of power
Democracy(rule by many)
Oligarchy(rule by few)
Autocracy(rule by one)
Anarchy(rule by none)
Power ideology
(socio-political ideologies)
(socio-economic ideologies)
  • Religious
  • Secular
(geo-cultural ideologies)
Power structure
Unitarism
Client state
Federalism
International relations
Related
iconPolitics portal

Technocracyis a form ofgovernmentin which the decision-makers are selected based on their expertise in a given area of responsibility, particularly with regard to scientific or technical knowledge. Technocracy follows largely in the tradition of other meritocracy theories and assumes full state control over political and economic issues.[1]

This system explicitly contrasts withrepresentative democracy,the notion that elected representatives should be the primary decision-makers in government,[2]though it does not necessarily imply eliminating elected representatives. Decision-makers are selected based on specialized knowledge and performance rather than political affiliations, parliamentary skills, or popularity.[3]

The termtechnocracywas initially used to signify the application of thescientific methodto solving social problems. In its most extreme form, technocracy is an entiregovernmentrunning as a technical or engineering problem and is mostlyhypothetical.In more practical use, technocracy is any portion of abureaucracyrun bytechnologists.A government in which elected officials appoint experts and professionals to administer individual government functions, and recommend legislation, can be considered technocratic.[4][5]Some uses of the word refer to a form ofmeritocracy,where the ablest are in charge, ostensibly without the influence of special interest groups.[6]Critics have suggested that a "technocratic divide" challenges more participatory models of democracy, describing these divides as "efficacy gaps that persist between governing bodies employing technocratic principles and members of the general public aiming to contribute to government decision making".[7]

History of the term[edit]

The termtechnocracyis derived from the Greek words τέχνη,tekhnemeaningskilland κράτος,kratosmeaningpower,as ingovernance,orrule.William Henry Smyth, a California engineer, is usually credited with inventing the wordtechnocracyin 1919 to describe "the rule of the people made effective through the agency of their servants, the scientists and engineers", although the word had been used before on several occasions.[6][8][9]Smyth used the termTechnocracyin his 1919 article "'Technocracy'—Ways and Means to Gain Industrial Democracy" in the journalIndustrial Management(57).[10]Smyth's usage referred toIndustrial democracy:a movement to integrate workers into decision-making through existing firms or revolution.[10]

In the 1930s, through the influence ofHoward Scottand thetechnocracy movementhe founded, the term technocracy came to mean 'government by technical decision making', using an energy metric of value. Scott proposed that money be replaced by energy certificates denominated in units such asergsorjoules,equivalent in total amount to an appropriate nationalnet energybudget, and then distributed equally among theNorth Americanpopulation, according to resource availability.[11][2]

There is in common usage found the derivative termtechnocrat.The wordtechnocratcan refer to someone exercising governmental authority because of their knowledge,[12]"a member of a powerful technical elite", or "someone who advocates the supremacy of technical experts".[13][4][5]McDonnell and Valbruzzi define a prime minister or minister as a technocrat if "at the time of their appointment to government, they: have never held public office under the banner of a political party; are not a formal member of any party; and are said to possess recognized non-party political expertise which is directly relevant to the role occupied in government".[14]In Russia, thePresident of Russiahas often nominated ministers based on technical expertise from outside political circles, and these have been referred to as "technocrats".[15][16]

Precursors[edit]

Before the termtechnocracywas coined, technocratic or quasi-technocratic ideas involving governance by technical experts were promoted by various individuals, most notably early socialist theorists such asHenri de Saint-Simon.This was expressed by the belief in state ownership over the economy, with the state's function being transformed from pure philosophical rule over men into a scientific administration of things and a direction of production processes under scientific management.[17]According toDaniel Bell:

"St. Simon's vision of industrial society, a vision of pure technocracy, was a system of planning and rational order in which society would specify its needs and organize the factors of production to achieve them."[18]

Citing the ideas of St. Simon, Bell concludes that the "administration of things" by rational judgment is the hallmark of technocracy.[18]

Alexander Bogdanov,a Russian scientist and social theorist, also anticipated a conception of technocratic process. Both Bogdanov's fiction and his political writings, which were highly influential, suggest that he was concerned that a coming revolution against capitalism could lead to a technocratic society.[19][20]: 114 

From 1913 until 1922, Bogdanov immersed himself in writing a lengthy philosophical treatise of original ideas,Tectology: Universal Organization Science.Tectologyanticipated many basic ideas ofsystems analysis,later explored bycybernetics.InTectology,Bogdanov proposed unifying all social, biological, and physical sciences by considering them as systems of relationships and seeking organizational principles that underlie all systems.

Arguably, thePlatonicidea ofphilosopher-kingsrepresents a sort of technocracy in which the state is run by those with specialist knowledge, in this case, knowledge of the Good rather than scientific knowledge.[citation needed]The Platonic claim is that those who best understand goodness should be empowered to lead the state, as they would lead it toward the path of happiness. Whilst knowledge of the Good differs from knowledge of science, rulers are here appointed based on a certain grasp of technical skill rather than democratic mandate.

Characteristics[edit]

Technocrats are individuals with technical training and occupations who perceive many important societal problems as being solvable with the applied use oftechnologyand related applications. The administrative scientist Gunnar K. A. Njalsson theorizes that technocrats are primarily driven by their cognitive "problem-solution mindsets" and only in part by particular occupational group interests. Their activities and the increasing success of their ideas are thought to be a crucial factor behind the modern spread of technology and the largely ideological concept of the "information society".Technocrats may be distinguished from"econocrats"and"bureaucrats"whose problem-solution mindsets differ from those of the technocrats.[21]

Examples[edit]

The former government of theSoviet Unionhas been referred to as a technocracy.[22]Soviet leaders likeLeonid Brezhnevoften had a technical background. In 1986, 89% ofPolitburomembers were engineers.[22]

Leaders of theChinese Communist Partyused to be mostly professional engineers. According to surveys of municipal governments of cities with a population of 1 million or more inChina,it has been found that over 80% of government personnel had a technical education.[23][24]Under thefive-year plansof the People's Republic of China, projects such as theNational Trunk Highway System,theChina high-speed rail system,and theThree Gorges Damhave been completed.[25][page needed]During China's20th National Congress,a class of technocrats in finance and economics are replaced in favor of high-tech technocrats.[26][27]

In 2013, aEuropean Unionlibrary briefing on its legislative structure referred to theCommissionas a "technocratic authority", holding a "legislative monopoly" over the EU lawmaking process.[28]The briefing suggests that this system, which elevates theEuropean Parliamentto a vetoing and amending body, was "originally rooted in the mistrust of the political process in post-war Europe". This system is unusual since theCommission's sole right of legislative initiativeis a power usually associated with Parliaments.

Several governments in Europeanparliamentary democracieshave been labelled 'technocratic' based on the participation of unelected experts ('technocrats') in prominent positions.[4]Since the 1990s, Italy has had several such governments (in Italian,governo tecnico) in times of economic or political crisis,[29][30]including the formation in which economistMario Montipresided over acabinetof unelectedprofessionals.[31][32]The term 'technocratic' has been applied to governments where a cabinet of elected professional politicians is led by an unelected prime minister, such as in the cases of the 2011-2012 Greek government led by economistLucas Papademosand the Czech Republic's 2009–2010 caretaker government presided over by the state's chief statistician,Jan Fischer.[5][33]In December 2013, in the framework of the national dialogue facilitated by theTunisian National Dialogue Quartet,political parties inTunisiaagreed to install a technocratic government led byMehdi Jomaa.[34]

The article "Technocrats: Minds Like Machines"[5]states thatSingaporeis perhaps the best advertisement for technocracy: the political and expert components of the governing system there seem to have merged completely. This was underlined in a 1993 article in "Wired" by Sandy Sandfort,[35]where he describes the information technology system of the island even at that early date making it effectively intelligent.

Engineering[edit]

Following Samuel Haber,[36]Donald Stabile argues that engineers were faced with a conflict between physical efficiency andcost efficiencyin the new corporate capitalist enterprises of the late nineteenth-centuryUnited States.Because of their perceptions of market demand, the profit-conscious, non-technical managers of firms where the engineers work often impose limits on the projects that engineers desire to undertake.

The prices of all inputs vary with market forces, thereby upsetting the engineer's careful calculations. As a result, the engineer loses control over projects and must continually revise plans. To maintain control over projects, the engineer must attempt to control these outside variables and transform them into constant factors.[37]

Technocracy movement[edit]

Main article:Technocracy movement

The American economist and sociologistThorstein Veblenwas an early advocate of technocracy and was involved in theTechnical Alliance,as wereHoward ScottandM. King Hubbert(the latter of whom later developed the theory ofpeak oil). Veblen believed technological developments would eventually lead to a socialistic reorganization of economic affairs. Veblen saw socialism as one intermediate phase in an ongoing evolutionary process in society that would be brought about by the natural decay of the business enterprise system and the rise of the engineers.[38]Daniel Bellsees an affinity between Veblen and theTechnocracy movement.[39]

In 1932,Howard ScottandMarion King HubbertfoundedTechnocracy Incorporatedand proposed that money be replaced by energy certificates. The group argued that apolitical, rational engineers should be vested with the authority to guide an economy into a thermodynamically balanced load of production and consumption, thereby doing away with unemployment anddebt.[2]

The technocracy movement was briefly popular in the US in the early 1930s during theGreat Depression.By the mid-1930s, interest in the movement was declining. Some historians have attributed the decline to the rise of Roosevelt'sNew Deal.[40][41]

Historian William E. Akin rejects this conclusion. Instead, Akin argues that the movement declined in the mid-1930s due to the technocrats' failure to devise a 'viable political theory for achieving change'.[42]Akin postulates that many technocrats remained vocal, dissatisfied, and often sympathetic to anti-New Deal third-party efforts.[43]

Critiques[edit]

Critics have suggested that a "technocratic divide" exists between a governing body controlled to varying extents by technocrats and members of the general public.[7]Technocratic divides are "efficacy gaps that persist between governing bodies employing technocratic principles and members of the general public aiming to contribute to government decision making."[7]Technocracy privileges the opinions and viewpoints of technical experts, exalting them into a kind ofaristocracywhile marginalizing the opinions and viewpoints of the general public.[44][45]

As major multinational technology corporations (e.g.,FAANG) swellmarket capsand customer counts, critiques of technocratic government in the 21st century see its manifestation inAmerican politicsnot as an "authoritarian nightmare of oppression and violence" but rather as anéminence grise:a democraticcabaldirected byMark Zuckerbergand the entire cohort of "Big Tech"executives.[46][47]In his 1982Technology and Culturejournal article, "The Technocratic Image and the Theory of Technocracy", John G. Gunnell writes: "...politics is increasingly subject to the influence of technological change", with specific reference to the advent ofThe Long Boomand the genesis of theInternet,following the1973–1975 recession.[48][49]Gunnel goes on to add three levels of analysis that delineate technology's political influence:

  1. "Political power tends to gravitate towards technological elites".
  2. "Technology has become autonomous" and thus impenetrable by political structures.
  3. "Technology (and science) constitute a new legitimizing ideology", as well as triumphing over "tribalism,nationalism,the crusading spirit in religion, bigotry, censorship, racism, persecution, immigration and emigration restrictions, tariffs, andchauvinism".[48][50]

In each of the three analytical levels, Gunnell foretells technology's infiltration of political processes and suggests that the entanglement of the two (i.e. technology and politics) will inevitably produce power concentrations around those with advanced technological training, namely the technocrats.[48]Forty years after the publication of Gunnell's writings, technology and government have become, for better or for worse, increasingly intertwined.[51][52][53]Facebookcan be considered a technocratic microcosm, a "technocratic nation-state" with acyberspatialpopulation that surpasses any terrestrial nation.[54]In a broader sense, critics fear that the rise of social media networks (e.g.Twitter,YouTube,Instagram,Pinterest), coupled with the "decline in mainstream engagement", imperil the "networked young citizen" to inconspicuous coercion and indoctrination by algorithmic mechanisms, and, less insidiously, to the persuasion of particular candidates based predominantly on "Social Media engagement".[55][56][57]

In a 2022 article published inBoston Review,political scientist Matthew Cole highlights two problems with technocracy: that it creates "unjust concentrations of power" and relies on a "flawed theory of knowledge".[58]With respect to the first point, Cole argues that technocracy excludes citizens from policy-making processes while advantaging elites. With respect to the second, he argues that the value of expertise is overestimated in technocratic systems, and points to an alternative concept of "smart democracy" which enlists the knowledge of ordinary citizens.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. ^"What Is Technocracy? Definition, How It Works, and Critiques".Investopedia.Retrieved2024-01-11.
  2. ^abcBerndt, Ernst R. (1982)."From technocracy to net energy analysis: engineers, economists and recurring energy theories of value"(PDF).Studies in Energy and the American Economy, discussion paper 11. Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.hdl:1721.1/2023.
  3. ^"Questioning of M. King Hubbert, Division of Supply and Resources, before the Board of Economic Warfare"(PDF).1943-04-14. Archived fromthe original(PDF)on 2019-03-31.Retrieved2008-05-04.p.35 (p.44 of PDF), p.35
  4. ^abc"Who, What, Why: What can technocrats achieve that politicians can't?".BBC News.BBC. November 14, 2011.RetrievedApril 23,2013.
  5. ^abcd"Technocrats: Minds like machines".The Economist.19 November 2011.Retrieved21 February2012.
  6. ^ab"History and Purpose of Technocracy by Howard Scott".Technocracy.org. Archived fromthe originalon 22 April 2009.
  7. ^abcObar, Jonathan A. (2016)."Closing the Technocratic Divide? Activist Intermediaries, Digital Form Letters, and Public Involvement in FCC Policy Making".International Journal of Communication.10.
  8. ^"Who Is A Technocrat? – Wilton Ivie – (1953)".2001-03-11. Archived fromthe originalon December 30, 2004.Retrieved2012-05-16.
  9. ^Barry Jones(1995, fourth edition).Sleepers, Wake! Technology and the Future of Work,Oxford University Press, p. 214.
  10. ^abOxford English Dictionary 3rd edition (Word from 2nd edition 1989)
  11. ^"Technocracy - Define Technocracy at Dictionary.com".Dictionary.com.
  12. ^"Technocracy facts, information, pictures | Encyclopedia.com articles about Technocracy".www.encyclopedia.com.Retrieved2017-01-09.
  13. ^Wickman, Forrest (November 11, 2011)."What's a Technocrat?".Slate.The Slate Group.
  14. ^McDonnell, Duncan; Valbruzzi, Marco (2014)."Defining and classifying technocrat-led and technocratic governments".European Journal of Political Research.53(4): 654–671.doi:10.1111/1475-6765.12054.
  15. ^Peleschuk, Dan (14 June 2017)."If Putin Died Tomorrow, Who Would Take Over? These Technocrats Have a Chance".Ozy.
  16. ^"The plight of Russia's technocrats".Intersection Project. 2017-08-15. Archived fromthe originalon 2019-04-25.Retrieved2018-01-07.
  17. ^Encyclopædia Britannica,Saint Simon;Socialism
  18. ^abBell, Daniel (2008) [1st. Pub. 1976].The Coming Of Post-industrial Society.Basic Books. p.76.ISBN978-0465097135.Retrieved2014-11-02.
  19. ^"Bogdanov, technocracy and socialism".worldsocialism.org.Archived fromthe originalon 2007-09-26.
  20. ^Remington, Thomas F. (1984).Building socialism in Bolshevik Russia: ideology and industrial organization 1917-1921.Pittsburgh, Pa: University of Pittsburgh press.ISBN0-8229-3809-X.
  21. ^Njálsson, Gunnar K. A. (2005). "From Autonomous to Socially Conceived Technology: Toward a Causal, Intentional and Systematic Analysis of Interests and Elites in Public Technology Policy".Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory.52(108): 56–81.doi:10.3167/th.2005.5210805.JSTOR41802302.
  22. ^abGraham, Loren R. (1993).The Ghost of the Executed Engineer: Technology and the Fall of the Soviet Union.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. pp.73-74.ISBN9780674354364.
  23. ^Cheng, Li; White, Lynn (1990). "Elite Transformation and Modern Change in Mainland China and Taiwan: Empirical Data and the Theory of Technocracy".The China Quarterly.121(121): 1–35.doi:10.1017/S0305741000013497.JSTOR654061.S2CID154544102.
  24. ^"Why do Chinese leaders have a degree in engineering and American leaders have degrees in law?".Gigazine. 2016-03-01.Retrieved2018-03-18.
  25. ^Andreas, Joel (2009).Rise of the Red Engineers: The Cultural Revolution and the Origins of China's New Class.Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.ISBN9780804760775.
  26. ^"Why Chinese leader Xi Jinping wants more technocrats in key roles".South China Morning Post.2022-05-17.
  27. ^"A new breed of technocratic elites in the Xi era: Countdown to the 20th Party Congress".Think China, Singapore.2022-09-30.
  28. ^"Parliament's legislative initiative"(PDF).Library of the European Parliament.24 Oct 2013.Retrieved24 May2019.
  29. ^Gundle, Stephen; Parker, Simon, eds. (1996) [1st. Pub. 1996].The new Italian Republic: from the fall of the Berlin Wall to Berlusconi.Routledge.ISBN978-0-415-12162-0.Retrieved21 February2012.
  30. ^D'Alimonte, Roberto; Bartolini, Stefano (1997)."'Electoral Transition' and party system change in Italy ".In Bull, Martin J; Rhodes, Martin (eds.).In: Crisis and transition in Italian politics.Routledge. p. 226.ISBN978-0-7146-4366-3.
  31. ^MacKenzie, James; Moody, Barry (16 November 2011)."Italy gets new technocrat government".Reuters.Retrieved19 February2012.
  32. ^"Italy's new prime minister — The full Monti: Mario Monti holds out for a technocratic government until 2013".The Economist.19 November 2011.Retrieved19 February2012.
  33. ^"Q&A: Greece's 'technocratic' government".BBC News.11 November 2011.Retrieved21 February2012.
  34. ^"Tunisia's new prime minister takes office".AlJazeera.Retrieved17 November2015.
  35. ^Sandfort, Sandy (1993)."The Intelligent Island".Wired.Vol. 1, no. 4 (September/October).ISSN1059-1028.
  36. ^Haber, Samuel.Efficiency and UpliftChicago: University of Chicago Press, 1964.
  37. ^Stabile, Donald R. (1986). "Veblen and the Political Economy of the Engineer".American Journal of Economics and Sociology.45(1): 41–52.doi:10.1111/j.1536-7150.1986.tb01899.x.
  38. ^ Wood, John(1993).The life of Thorstein Veblen and perspectives on his thought.introd. Thorstein Veblen. New York: Routledge. p. 369.ISBN978-0-415-07487-2.The decisive difference between Marx and Veblen lay in their respective attitudes on socialism. For while Marx regarded socialism as the ultimate goal for civilization, Veblen saw socialism as but one stage in the economic evolution of society.
  39. ^Bell, Daniel (1963). "Veblen and the New Class".The American Scholar.32(4): 616–638.JSTOR41209141.(cited inTilman, Rick (1992).Thorstein Veblen and His Critics, 1891-1963: Conservative, Liberal, and Radical Perspectives.Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. p. 186.ISBN9781400862863.)
  40. ^Burris, Beverly H. (1993).Technocracy at Work.State University of New York Press. p. 32.ISBN9780791414958.
  41. ^Fischer, Frank (1990).Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise.SAGE Publications. p. 86.ISBN9780803933798.
  42. ^Nelson, Daniel (1978). "Technocratic Abundance. [Reviewed Work:Technocracy and the American Dream: The Technocrat Movement, 1900-1941.by William E. Akin] ".Reviews in American History.6(1): 104–108.doi:10.2307/2701484.JSTOR2701484.
  43. ^McNulty, P. J. (1978). "Technocracy and the American Dream: The Technocrat Movement, 1900-1941.By William E. Akin [book review] ".History of Political Economy.10(4): 682–683.doi:10.1215/00182702-10-4-682.
  44. ^Fisher, W.R. (1987).Human communication as narration: Toward a philosophy of reason, value and action.Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.
  45. ^McKenna, Bernard J.; Graham, Philip (2000)."Technocratic Discourse: A Primer".Journal of Technical Writing and Communication.30(3): 223–251.doi:10.2190/56FY-V5TH-2U3U-MHQK.S2CID142939905.
  46. ^Runciman, David (2018-05-01)."Why replacing politicians with experts is a reckless idea".The Guardian.ISSN0261-3077.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  47. ^Blum, Sam (16 January 2020)."How All Our Tech Heroes Turned into Tech Villains".GQ.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  48. ^abcGunnell, John G. (July 1982). "The Technocratic Image and the Theory of Technocracy".Technology and Culture.23(3): 392–416.doi:10.2307/3104485.JSTOR3104485.PMID11611029.S2CID41734855.
  49. ^Peter Schwartz; Peter Leyden (1997-07-01)."The Long Boom: A History of the Future, 1980–2020".Wired.ISSN1059-1028.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  50. ^Boorstin, Daniel J.The Republic of Technology(New York, 1978), p. 6, 59.
  51. ^"Jeff Bezos Says Tech Shouldn't Turn Against the Federal Government".www.govtech.com.17 October 2018.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  52. ^Editorial Board."Opinion | Facebook is looking a lot like a government".Washington Post.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  53. ^Leetaru, Kalev."Facebook As The Ultimate Government Surveillance Tool?".Forbes.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  54. ^LaFrance, Adrienne (2020-01-25)."Hillary Clinton: Mark Zuckerberg Has 'Authoritarian' Views on Misinformation".The Atlantic.Retrieved2020-06-13.
  55. ^Brian D. Loader, Ariadne Vromen & Michael A. Xenos (2014)The networked young citizen: social media, political participation and civic engagement, Information,Communication & Society, 17:2
  56. ^Norris, P. (2002). Democratic phoenix: Reinventing democratic activism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
  57. ^Effing, Robin; Van Hillegersberg, Jos; Huibers, Theo (2011)."Social Media and Political Participation: Are Facebook, Twitter and YouTube Democratizing Our Political Systems?"(PDF).In Efthimios Tambouris; Ann Macintosh; Hans Bruijn (eds.).Human Media Interaction.Electronic Participation: Third IFIP WG 8.5 International Conference, ePart 2011, Delft, The Netherlands, August 29 – September 1, 2011. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 6847. pp. 25–35.doi:10.1007/978-3-642-23333-3_3.ISBN978-3-642-23332-6.
  58. ^Cole, Matthew.""What's Wrong with Technocracy"? ".Boston Review.Retrieved12 October2022.

External links[edit]

Wikiquote has quotations related toTechnocracy.
Wikimedia Commons has media related toTechnocracy.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Technocracy&oldid=1233123993"