DEFINING ‘TECHNOCRACY’
A REVIEW
INTRODUCTION
Technocracy was incorporated in 1934. The Technocracy Study Course was published the same year. Now, over 70 years later, there is still no officially published definition of the original (Howard Scott’s) term ‘Technocracy’.* By default dictionaries use a corrupt and narrow meaning (see No.3 definition below) which has effectively displaced Howard Scott and has virtually extinguished the concepts which he developed as ‘Technocracy’.
This writer has proposed a dictionary definition, not yet officially recognized:
“TECHNOCRACY: 1. An advanced industrial society of continental extent in which the supporting economy uses energy units for measurement and control, in place of the monetary values (money) of the Price System. 2. A membership society or a movement advocating adoption of this concept. 3. A derived and corrupt meaning of the word, in wide use, indicating management or rule by specialized experts in place of elected representatives or non-specialists.”
………………………………………………………………..
FROM THE RECORD
The following text gives examples of Howard Scott’s explanation of Technocracy
as recorded at a number of public meetings and interviews from 1935 to 1964.
EXAMPLE 1
6 Feb 1935. Radio Address, WEVD, New York, NY. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott, Vol.1, p.15.)
Howard Scott: “Technocracy is the advance of physical science into the social field…it is the Technological Army of the New America!”
…………………………………………………………………………
EXAMPLE 2
6 Dec 1935. Address at Engineering Auditorium, New York, NY. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott, Vol.1, p.37).
Howard Scott: “Technocracy is not a social theory. It is a social mechanics, a methodology of accounting the rates of growth of all energy-consuming devices, organic and inorganic, applied to an order of human affairs on a definite, quantitative basis for the first time in history.”
………………………………………………………………………..
EXAMPLE 3
30 Aug 1951. Meeting of members & friends in Akron, Ohio. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott. Vol.2, p.329).
Wilton Ivy: “Technocracy is the organization which represents the forefront of the application of science to human affairs -- -science applied to the social order.”(Howard Scott spoke later on this occasion).
………………………………………………………………………
EXAMPLE 4
Here is a transcript of an occasion when Scott was directly asked about a definition but did not offer one.
4 Dec 1952. Membership meeting Kent, Ohio. (from “Words and Wisdom of Howard Scott”, Vol.2, p.443.
Question: The American collegiate dictionary that was put out recently has a definition of technocracy spelled with a small “t: Does CHQ have a copy?
Howard Scott: “No, we haven’t got that. We don’t care whether it’s a small “t” or a big “T”.”
Question: I don’t remember the definition, but I think it uses the word “advocate” social change.
Would you say something on that?
Howard Scott: “Well, I don’t know the definition.”
………………………………………………………………………
EXAMPLE 5
20 Mar 1958. Interview at Cleveland Press Club. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott, Vol.2,p.637).
Howard Scott: “Technocracy is the rule of science”.
……………………………………………………………………………
EXAMPLE 6
3rd May 1963. Interview by Cleveland Press. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott. Vol.3, p.879/880).
Howard Scott: “Technocracy is the rule of science.”… “It’s a whole system of geomechanics of operating of earth’s services, whether they’re below the surface or on it, and so on, of operating everything that is concerned in the production and distribution of so-called physical wealth”.
…………………………………………………………………………
EXAMPLE 7
11 Jul 1964. Radio Interview at GJOR, Vancouver, BC. (Words & Wisdom of Howard Scott. Vol.3, p.935).
Howard Scott: “Technocracy is a whole new design of operating a continental area on the basis of modern technology…what is the maximum use that can be obtained by the application of science to the physical resources of the continent with a maximum of conservation...Technocracy is the rule of science.”
……………………………………………………………………………
CONCLUSION
These few examples (there are many more) seem to indicate that Scott (and other official spokespersons) preferred descriptive generalities (of the Technate?) rather than a precise and exclusive definition of ‘Technocracy’, which, I contend, must specify measurement and control of the economy by energy measures. (Nevertheless in the same speech he could refer to the critical energy level – 200,000 kg.cal per capita per day - as the breakdown point of the Price System, requiring replacement by the energy criteria of a Technocracy.)
Howard Scott was a careful strategist and tactition. So this deficiency may be deliberate but so far is unexplained. In any case this has resulted in the unfortunate situation that there is, to this date, no published and authoritative dictionary definition of Technocracy offered by Technocracy Inc.
It is late and perhaps impossible now to correct this problem. Nevertheless it devolves upon the membership and the administration of Technocracy Inc. to use every means and every occasion to proclaim an authoritative definition.
Technocracy’s (and Howard Scott’s) fallback position is expressed by a quote he used from the French poet Victor Hugo: “All the forces in the world are not as powerful as an idea whose time has come.” Scott was confident, as we are, that the point in historic time is imminent for the Technocracy concept to be adopted and constructed as the ‘New America’, with or without a formal dictionary definition.
………………………………………………………….
*Before adopting the word ‘technocracy’ Scott and the Technical Alliance determined that it had been used on occasions prior to Edward Belamy’s claim as originator of the term.
09 May 2010. Walter Fryers, Edmonton, Alberta.