Technocracy explained and debunked, from Spartacus at iceni.substack.com:
The authorities are getting to be too comfortable with the idea of reengineering organisms, including humans, and regulatory safeguards are nonexistent
Time For a Reckoning
Fair warning. This is going to be very cynical. Even more than my usual level of cynicism, in fact. If you’re not into that, I totally understand, but in light of recent developments, some things simply have to be said, no matter how insensitive they are.
After my last conversation with ChatGPT, the overall scope of the problems we face became clearer. These problems are deep and systemic, and they go far, far beyond any one virus or vaccine.
Technocracy is, at its core, the notion that political problems should have technological solutions. The original technocracy movement as conceived by Howard Scott did not regard itself as a political movement of any sort. They wanted to abolish politicians and, by extension, politics.
Every conceivable political problem was one of mere engineering to them. Human desires weren’t a part of the equation at all. Plastic grocery bags choking waterways? Force people to use biodegradable paper ones and stop handing out plastic bags at stores. People riding on the steps on streetcars? Don’t fine the errant riders, just remove the steps so there’s nothing to stand on. People speeding and driving drunk? Electronically govern the top speed of their vehicles, and make their steering wheel breathalyze them before they can turn the key in the ignition. Immediate and obvious parallels to Nudge Theory and other social-cybernetic schemes can be drawn. In many ways, the core tenets of technocratic ideology are already a widely accepted component of our politics, if the constant parade of “experts” on television and their embrace of scientism are any indication.
Wow! This was no “easy” read – not in any context! My only comment, one of only very limited relevance to the entirety of this “cynical” post is this:
You state, “Human beings have one imperative above all others, and that is to survive and perpetuate our genes. We share that in common with all other animals, with one caveat. We do something that no other species does. We romanticize it.”
The “caveat,” Sparticus, is that we have evolved with the power to choose if, when, how, why, and all other values, including the choice of where to place in our hierarchy of values, “our survival and perpetuation of our genes!”
And THAT is what “they” are after and wish to end!
A fascinating read!