“A citizen of the Technate is free to do anything they wish, as long as their actions do not harm citizens”– how do criminals get dealt with? Is there a Technate plan for dealing with criminals? What if they do not respond to the treatment/punishment? Who decides what is a fitting punishment for such undesirables?

EVERY system of government (or Technate, or whatever clever euphemisms one can devise) must deal with these kinds of questions before offering a vision of Utopian idealsim. This is always the measure of a control system’s validity, no matter how lofty their goals are.

Even the Eloi in H.G. Wells’ “The Time Machine” had to deal with the Morlocks every now and then, no?

On a more idealogical note:

Attention has already been called to the fact that the human body is composed chemically of the ordinary substances of which rocks are made. So are dogs, horses and pigs. In an earlier lesson, while discussing the ‘human engine,’ we pointed out that the human body obeys identically the same laws of energy transformation as a steam engine. This also is true of dogs, horses and pigs. These facts might lead one to suspect that human beings are very far removed from the semi-supernatural creatures they have heretofore supposed themselves to be.

One can reach the opposite conclusion, i.e. that the physical similarities between human and nonhuman animals suggests that humans, dogs, horses, and pigs are all equally semi-supernatural creatures. I choose to follow in this direction because it leads to a consciousness filled with meaning, with lively spirits and beautiful things, if also with difficult moral choices and some horror; the other choice leads to an ugly world filled with dead objects meaninglessly colliding with each other.

http://www.vcn.bc.ca/~educator/humans.htm

Can you provide links for where you pulled those quotes from?

It’s from the book I quoted earlier. Like I said, I’ll drop it off at the Metaphysical Library.

Granted, it’s copyright 1940 or so, Pavlovian psychology might have been cutting edge back then.

* * *

Managing the Human Machine

http://www.technocracy.ca/index.php?na...038;file=viewtopic&p=21044#21044

I have found a document which seems to relate to Technocracy, Inc (it uses it’s logo and name), but which I am not certain of the authenticity.

I am not sure where the first page of it starts, but this is lesson 20 of an online Technocracy study course, entitled “The Nature of The Human Animal”

The reason I bring this up, is that I think there are a number of quotes in it which seem to paint Technocracy in a somewhat unfavorable light:

The developments in the fields of physiology, biochemistry and biophysics, chiefly since 1900, are at last bringing us down to earth. Attention has already been called to the fact that the human body is composed chemically of the ordinary substances of which rocks are made. So are dogs, horses and pigs. In an earlier lesson, while discussing the ‘human engine,’ we pointed out that the human body obeys identically the same laws of energy transformation as a steam engine. This also is true of dogs, horses and pigs. These facts might lead one to suspect that human beings are very far removed from the semi-supernatural creatures they have heretofore supposed themselves to be.

There was still, however, the age-old puzzle of human behavior and of what we called ‘thinking.’ It might be remarked that the most minute anatomical dissection had never revealed anything that corresponded to a ‘mind’ or a conscience’ or a ‘will.’ The reason for this is not difficult to find when one considers that all of these terms were inherited from an ignorant, barbarian past, and had never been subjected to scientific scrutiny. Let us remember that real scientific progress is at all times based upon the correlation of objectively observable (see, feel, hear, taste, smell, etc.) phenomena. When we subject’ such concepts as the human ‘mind’ to this sort of test they rapidly fade out of existence. When we observe a human being we merely perceive an object which makes a certain variety of motions and noises. The same is true, however, when we observe a dog or a Ford car. Only the form is different in each case, and the particular pattern of motions and noises is different.

The discussion then goes into talking about how human beings are only unique in that they may be conditioned to behave in certain ways very quickly, and that this seems to be one of the only true signs of our intelligence or uniqueness.

So first of all, I would like to find out if this is indeed official orthodox Technocracy, Inc teaching. And if so, where did it come from, and how come I can’t find it on any of your official sites?

Secondly, if Technocracy openly sees the human being as a machine which can be conditioned for specific purposes and conceives of the sublme notion of the human soul and mind as “ignorant and barbarian” then what is to stop a Technocracy from managing people as though they are simply machines and nothing more?

Mini-golf is a highly ineffecient waste of resources. No educated member of the Technate would even conceive of wasting their time mini-golfing.

I think that’s actually a really good point. You can claim that people are allowed to do anything in a Technate, but the fact is, they can’t do anything that goes against the guiding principle of the Technate - which is the rational management of resources

Technocracy Inc. organizational schematic

“Another of these special sequences is the Armed Forces. The Armed forces, as the name implies, embraces the ordinary military land, water, and air forces, but most important of all, it also includes the entire internal police force of the Continent, the Continental Constabulatory…

“While the Continental Constabulatory is under the discipline of the Armed Forces, it receives its instructions and authorization for its specific action from the Social Relations and Area Control.”

“Let us remember that real scientific progress is at all times based upon the correlation of objectively observable phenomena. When we subject such concepts as the human ‘mind’ to this sort of test they rapidly fade out of existence. When we observe a human being we merely perceive an object which makes a certain variety of motions and noises. The same is true, however, when we observe a dog or a Ford car. Only the form is different in each case, and the particular pattern of motions and noises is different. We observe, likewise, certain cause and effect relationships. If, for instance, we press the horn button on the Ford car, the Ford produces a honk; if we step on the dog’s tail the dog yelps. Thus, we can say in the case of these two mechanisms, the dog and the car, that:

“Pressing horn button produces honk.
Stepping on tail produces yelp.

“We see, therefore, that when we begin to correlate what we actually observe, without introducing any of our inherited preconceptions, we can treat a dog with the same dispassionate objectivity which we are accustomed to use when dealing with Ford cars or radio sets.”

“Thinking, Speaking, Writing. Experiments with human beings have given the same kinds of results, with the exception that the human being requires a smaller number of repetitions to establish a conditioned reflex than a dog, and he can sustain a higher number of orders of conditioned reflexes than a dog can. It is of this that a superior intellect largely consists.”

“Control of Behavior. Practically all social control is effected through the mechanism of the conditioned reflex. The driver of an automobile, for instance, sees a red light ahead and immediately throws in the clutch and brake, and stops. This behavior is no whit different from that of a dog which hears a metronome and secrets saliva.

“Of no less importance in social control are the conditioned inhibitions. If they are taken young enough, human beings can be conditioned not to do almost anything under the sun. They can be conditioned not to use certain language, not to eat certain foods on certain days, not to work on certain days, not to mate in the absence of certain ceremonial words spoken over them, not to break into a grocery store for food even though they may not have eaten for days. Of course, the human being rationalizes all this by saying that it is ‘wrong,’ or that his ‘conscience’ would bother him, but the interesting thing about ‘wrong doing’ and ‘guilty consciences’ is that they are involved only in those cases where one’s past training has rigorously inhibited him from performing the actions in question.”

“In the Declaration of Independence there occurs the familiar line: ‘We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are create equal…’ This concept is philosophic in origin and, as we have seen, has no basis in biological fact. Upon biological fact, theories of democracy go to pieces.”

“Functional Priority. The greatest stability in a social organization would be obtained where the individuals were placed as nearly as possible with respect to other individuals in accordance with ‘peck-rights,’ or the priority relationship which they would assume naturally.”

“Thus, bankers, lawyers, policemen and politicians, as well as the members of of other professions are obliged to operate under a set of controls which are peculiar to the particular profession considered; any other human being under the same controls is likely to behave in a similar manner. This being the case, the only possible way of eliminating those types of behavior which are socially objectionable, and of replacing them with types of behavior which are socially unobjectionable is to alter the controls accordingly. No amount of social moralizing ever has, or ever will, affect this to any appreciable effect.”

More seriously I wonder of these Technocrats have actually been trapped in a conspiracy by totalitarian beurocrats. This organisation remains competely unknown to me, and it’s near anarchic technocracy is seductive, but the only technocracy know to me is the beurocratic freedom denying one. My paranoia says that is because the beurocracy wishes to assimilate anyone skilled in science and technology.

Regarding these techocrats, I don’t understand how they deal with conflict in science.
For instance between climate scientists, and scientists in the energy industry. Or between pro and anti peak-oilers. While science searches for the truth, it often gets itself stuck in corners where opposing theories seem equally true, and when the correct decision is essential to the improvement of the human condition the technate and all the people under it will be in trouble.

Tim - I’m gonna flake out on that assignment and let you read it yourself. I’ll drop it off at the Metaphysical Library sometime this week.

The problem is that without any kind of nod to human values, this governing body would ultimately reach the logical conclusion that to protect infrastructure and resources the best, human behavior would first need to be regulated - thus restricting individual liberty. Even further down the road than that though is that to ultimately protect resources, it would make the most sense to completely eliminate humanity from the picture altogether, and design some kind of AI, with nanotech and robots whose task was to be perfectly controlled and perfectly in line with the system to perpetuate it outside of the realm of human failings.

Also: just because you call it a “Technate” and not a “government” doesn’t make it somehow different, save in a hypnotic-marketing magician’s sense, if the function is the same (mass control of a very vital part of each individual’s reality concentrated in some very select hands).

Also: the talk of this “Continent’s Destiny” sounds like the ol’ saw of Manifest Destiny, just in new, non-God-centric language. How exactly is the underlying drive of such a myth different, other than in its verbal plumage?–Honest question, though I’m definitely dubious.

make a game out of cherry-picking and reproducing here just the paragraphs

Oh, please do. By all means!

Not an easy question, nor one I trust anyone to answer authoritatively. Of course, that’s an indicator of why the problems exist, in the first place, that these people apparantly seek to correct. What a fucking paradox that is!

Sec. 4, Regional Div. 12247
TECHNOCRACY INC.
5012 University Way Seattle

“Technocracy Inc. is a non-profit membership organization incorporated under the laws of the State of New York. It is a Continental Organization. It is not a financial racket or a political party.
“Technocracy Inc. operates only on the North American Continent through the structure of its own Continental Headquarters, Area Controls, Regional Divisions, Sections, and Organizers as a self-disciplined, self-controlled organization. It has no affiliations with any other organization, movement, or association, whether in North America, or elsewhere
“Technocracy points out that this Continent has the natural resources, the physical equipment, and the trained personnel to produce an abundance.
“Technocracy finds that the production and distribution of an abundance of physical wealth on a Continental scale for the use of all Continental citizens can only be accomplished by a Continental technological control - a governance of function - a Technate.
“Technocracy declares that this Continent has a rendezvous with Destiny; that this Continent must decide between Abundance and Chaos within the next few years. Technocracy realizes that this decision must be made by a mass movement of North Americans trained and self-disciplined, capable of operating a technological mechanism of production and distribution on the Continent when the present Price System becomes impotent to operate. Technocracy In.c is notifying every intelligent and courageous North American that his future tomorrow rests on what he does today. Technocracy offers the specification and the blueprints of Continental physical operations for the production of abundance for every citizen.”

“A citizen of the Technate is free to do anything they wish, as long as their actions do not harm citizens”, this is where the few Technocratic laws come in, obviously this prohibits things like Murder, Assault, Rape, Robbery, etc… But it gives people the Freedom to do anything else they might want.

Okay, but that’s not a black and white issue. Human nature being what it seems to be, that little “etc.” could start to get out of control. The pro life movement comes to mind. The stem cell research bullshit comes to mind. Then there’s the whole slew of things that, it could be argued if people wanted to argue it, can, potentially, or indirectly, cause harm to citizens. Where would the Technocracy draw the lines?