Shortly before his death, Auguste Comte, regarded as the most rational and progressive thinker in Europe, amazed friend and foe alike by addressing two flattering letters to Czar Nicholas I of Russia, the recognized leader of reaction and obscurantism. Comte appealed to the Czar to be the first to accept his new “System of Positive Politics,” insisting that Russia’s very insulation gave it a unique potential for bypassing the atomized parliamentary stage of Western European development and adopting directly an integrated new religion of humanity.

From “The Intelligentsia and the Religion of Humanity” by James H. Billington, via the American Historical Review, Vol. 65, No. 4 (Jul., 1960) , pp. 807-821

Comte founded sociology, of course. I wonder if we might be able to find a similar appeal made to other historical leaders by intellectuals, perhaps urging a variation of the same, but in the later historical context perhaps of either Nazism or the Russian communist system

http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0002-8762(196007)65%3A4%3C807%3ATIATRO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-3

i`m a listener before a reader so i listen to the audio files mostly but the link above is indicative of the scope of alan`s scolarship and perception of the technocracy at play in our society.
he has made many of the same observations as i did growing up in england. for instance, considering that we won the war against germany, why was thier economy so much stronger? in the sixties our industry began to fail and through the seventies british products went to shit, while german and japanese products improved and sold worldwide. bmw, toyota, panasonic, audi, volkswagen, braun, etc. this is one brief example, one that my teenage mind noticed those years ago.

I have entertained, from time to time, the thought that those in power are not fundamentally evil. It’s a distinct possibility. I felt like they might be behaving as if they knew better and had to make hard choices, etc. etc. and, well, basically you know which road is paved with good intentions.

I have known many a smart person. They often share similar defects or short-comings. Amongst such short comings is frequently found a sense that no one can know what or feel what the intelligencia feels or knows.

The super intelligent or elite technocrat are still (I presume) human. I think it is reasonable to assume that they still share some of us ‘usual’ human shortcomings.

I’m looking forward to more ruminating about the technocratic barnyard.

Consider this - they have given “us” enough to keep us happy and distracted. Not necessarily evil - just pragmatic. Let’s satisfy enough people and give as many people as who will take it a good life. Then, when that model is perfected as best it can we can impose it on the rest of the world, any way we can but the quickest would be best, so that the vast majority of people will enjoy the life “we” can provide.

But, of course, such a delusion is offensive and evil by most standards. But maybe not if you were in charge.

Technocracy is fun. It’s good to be in on the ground level of a conspiracy.

science should be as value-free as possible, and the ultimate goal of science is to produce knowledge, regardless of politics, morals, values, etc. involved in the research.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_positivism