A common misconception is that in our Technate those who are part of Technocracy Inc. would be in positions of control. No, nope, and not so. The Organization has no assumption of power theory it exists only to preserve the social design and to tell the citizens about it.
First Our North American Technate will NOT be a form of social operation that would be run by scientists so forget that notion. Such an assumption most likely has its origin in science fiction and fantasy movies or from listening to the hastily formed opinions of those who have heard of the work of Technocracy Inc. Est. 1933 of WA State but have not taken the time to gain a proper understanding of it.
Now, what type of people would be at the top?
First, one of the fascinating features of a governance of function is that no leader is created for people to follow! There would be a Continental Board of Directors with a chairperson whose duty it would be to coordinate the various operational sequences of our Continent and it is important to understand that their efforts would NOT be directed towards running the lives of the individual, but rather to the production of consumable goods and the distribution of all goods to the individual. This unique social design does not rely upon honesty as it includes no mechanism whereby administrators could `pile up' personal fortunes, or gain personal power in the usual ways by controlling the means of production or distribution. The possibility of anyone becoming a supreme dictator is also made next to impossible and here is how. Everyone’s educational period goes on until they are age twenty five at which time they may begin working in the social sequence of choice, but only up to age forty five then they drop out of the work force (note: this form of retirement would not result in any reduction of ability to acquire goods or services.) So, rising to the most influential position of all would, with little doubt, take almost twenty years. So whoever does get to the top would not likely be at the top long enough to establish dictatorial control. You must understand from the outset that this method of social operation has no precedent in human history and therefore must be examined without pre-conceived notions. Those of a functional government will be the masters of technology not of humans.
social problems using engineered solutions
Only technical people can solve the problems of a highly technical modern society here is an example of how. Street cars once had boarding platforms on the outside of them which people were constantly trying to ride on many fell off and were injured. First signs were put up prohibiting the dangerous practice, but the passengers still crowded the platform. Then ordinances were passed and fines set the platform remained as crowded as before. Policemen, legislators, public service commissions all took a hand but to no effect; then the problem was put up to an engineer. The engineers solved it easily. They built cars that didn't have platforms.
When it comes to the solving of social problems there are no two sides to any questions in the minds of engineers. if they have the answer, there it is. If they haven't, the only thing to do is go and get it. The fact that the answer is still unknown doesn't permit the assumption that there is more than one answer.
There is no insurmountable problem ahead of the North American people.
We can have prosperity for everyone just as soon as we are willing to go after it. All that we need in order to get prosperity is sufficient natural wealth, sufficient skill, sufficient industrial equipment, sufficient labor power, and intelligent direction. We have all of these things except the last, and there is no reason under the sun why we can't have that as soon as our technical people decide to get it together.
These then are the traits we may require of those
who would be our masters of technology.
Compiled after studies of both successful and unsuccessful mega-projects over the past fifty years.
How positions would be filled.
Positions are filled based on the proven method of nomination from below and appointment from above. For example, if a position were vacated for whatever reason, then the people immediately below that position would nominate candidates from among their ranks for the position. Then, the managers from the rank above the position would choose from those candidates the person most qualified for the job. This is the method that is most often used in the technical portions of present organizations, and is based on competence. Competence of the person is determined by the consistent operation of the technology involved. If such machinery should fail to operate within acceptable parameters, then the person responsible would be quickly removed and replaced with someone who could perform the job adequately. The only exception to this is the position of Continental Director, only because there is no one higher. This position is selected from the members of the Continental Board of Directors by the Continental Board of Directors, for it is they who best know who among them is most capable of handling the job.
The physical equipment of North America is already being operated by the technical people of the area, and they are doing their job very well considering the handicaps and deadweight imposed upon them by the overburden of business, politics and superstition. Think how much easier and simpler it would be for the technical people if this overburden was removed and they had full responsibility. A functional government of a technological society would not be like any of the many varieties of government that have flimflammed the citizenries of the world for so many centuries. Let there be a governance of function, not an authoritarian regulation imposed upon the people by the institutions of non-science. The North American scientists are neither noblemen nor freemen in their society. Unless they are able to achieve some outstanding recognition, they must remain second-class professionals. The role of the scientist lacks social prestige, for the majority merely become servants of, businessmen, politicians, or the military.
The big advances in social operations will come from people who are trained in the techniques of science and technology when these people are no longer influenced or hindered by politicians, moralists, soldiers or businessmen. We note that the Challenger disaster was a result of politicians overruling technical people. In Canada the technical people were overruled and an Atomic Reactor was turned back on before safety concerns were seen to. It is frightening when we realize with whom among our countrymen social decisions rest. It is time for the scientists of North America to become responsible for the making of national policy and social decisions.
Scientists are responsible for the discovery and development of many things in the world which have a profound bearing, actual or potential, on social affairs. It is high time that the general public gave more consideration to the question of how much influence scientists should have in the determination of social policy and action. In this connection the term ``scientist'' as used here includes, technologists, engineers, technicians. Scientists, as a group, have proved themselves to be the most trustworthy and humanitarian of any group in society, as well as the most competent. They rate a role in determining the affairs of society far above any yet accorded them; a role far more significant than that of mere advisers to non-scientific decision makers. Science and technology have provided the means, and politics and business have made the decisions which gravely threaten the future survival of the entire population.
Dangerous uses of scientific knowledge are being promoted by agencies outside of the field of science. Scientists are inclined to be opposed to war, to human repression, to neglect of social advances, and to unequal treatment of humanity. But none of these scourges are alien to the practices of politics, business and the moralist who have subjugated them
A report issued by a committee of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, on the question: ``How far shall scientist go in actively participating in the determination of social policy?'' was published in SCIENCE magazine. In the opening paragraph we find The committee found that even a cursory examination of this question leads to a serious conclusion: that there is an impending crisis in the relationships between science and American society. This crisis is being generated by a basic disparity. At a time when decisive economic, political and social processes have become profoundly dependent on science, the discipline (science) has failed to attain its appropriate place in the management of public affairs.
The committee report deplores the fact that there is very little public interest in science and that it receives an unduly small amount of space in the press and on television, radio and screen. There is little inducement for young persons to enter science. Many of the scientifically trained people in America are being bid for by competing interests and thereby are being taken away from a self-interested pursuit in pure science. Plus, governments and industry are no longer funding basic undirected research. The report shows the difference between the growth of the physical and that of the biological and social sciences. As a consequence, developments in chemistry and physics, including nuclear energy, are pushed forward without adequate attention being given to their biological and social implications. Progress in basic science is lagging far behind the practical applications of science; much of the latter must rely on basic research done 20 or 30 years ago. What we need now is much more creative research directed toward the discovery of new knowledge about nature.
It is time for the technical men and women of North America to become forthright and aggressive in their insistence that a governance of function, administered by people of technical training and achievement, be instituted to replace the predatory gangsterism now imposed upon our society under the name of government of the people, by the people, and for the people. There is no question about the scientists of America being able to organize a governance of function. What is needed now is a modest amount of favorable publicity for science.
This job could be accomplished by the scientists and technologists of North America courageously acting together through the associations which they have already established. Timidity, hesitance and subservience are not becoming to scientists.go top
End of document