@AlisonCreekside
Thanks for asking! What you describe is an almost amusing (if it weren't so terrible) perversion of real characteristics of Technocracy. The idea is a threat to the powers that be and thus has come under attack in many ways, slander and libel being popular ones. Although to be fair, I suppose that what you read/heard was just a wildly bad interpretation from someone who hadn't looked at the idea too closely. 🤷

To clarify, the US, Canada, and Mexico are all supposed to join together voluntarily. It's not a dictatorship, quite the opposite in fact. The new country needs to be completely self-sufficient in terms of resources, but not isolationist. Not only would self-sufficiency allow us to no longer need to interfere in the affairs of other nations, we would be in a position to offer genuine help where it was needed, no strings attached.

Other countries from Central and South America were to be invited mostly for maximum protection, but that was more of a suggestion during wartimes.

Lastly, there would be no expelling of "foreigners" because Technocracy does not discriminate against anyone, by race, sex, religion, orientation, etc. simply because there is no scientific basis to do so. The only scientific way to define a "foreigner" would be to expel *all* humans from the continent, regardless of race or origin.

I hope that clears up things for you. If not, feel free to ask.

#Technocracy #technate

@isaackuo @GhostOnTheHalfShell @gerrymcgovern
Howard Scott's Technocracy has been talking about it for nearly a century now. They told us this collapse is coming, why, and what to do about it. And for a while it was working; Technocracy was the biggest social movement of the 30s and 40s. But since it would mean an end to political power and money, of course the rich and powerful have done everything they can to end it. Silence it, bribe it, demonize it (why "technocracy" is a dirty word today and means something totally different), and just as mentioned elsewhere, drown it out and keep people distracted.

I still think that it's our best hope though. Get rid of the problems at their source and start something new, something designed from the start to benefit everyone. No inequality, no discrimination, no nonsense.

https://www.technate.org/tiki-index.php?page=Begin

#Technocracy #technate

@simon_brooke
No, there is still some hope, it has just been well hidden.

All these projections are based off of using scarcity based economic models. We still have it in our power to minimize the harm that's already been done. But to do so we need to do something that is conceptually radical, but not actually physically difficult. A plan has been available to deal with this problem specifically for nearly a century now, but it has been suppressed by those in power because it threatens their wealth and positions.

The plan is called Technocracy, and it does away with the main impediments to real change like money and politics. No more profit seeking CEOs and companies, no more power hungry politicians. And this is not simply because they will not be allowed, but the very structure of this new system provides no mechanism for them to exist.

What is left is a system optimized to utilise our existing technology and resources to accomplish just two things: 1) to provide every citizen with the highest standard of living possible, and 2) to do so for the longest period possible. That second requirement means that sustainability is built in at every level. Nothing gets done unless it means no damage to the environment.

And all this doesn't even require any big reduction in the overall standard of living either. The efficiencies possible once the impediments of money and politics are gone are astounding. Really, it's almost as though the current system was designed to be as inefficient and harmful to the environment as possible. But it doesn't have to be that way provided we are willing to get to the root cause of the problem and cut it out.

Yes, we can't stop climate change suddenly and instantly reverse it, more damage will still be done from just the momentum. But we can stop contributing to it pretty quickly, minimizing the damage and letting things begin to sort out much sooner. Which means far fewer people will die, and those that live will be far less uncomfortable.

But there is a lot to this plan, certainly more than one can put in any social media post or even thread, but that's because it has been well thought out. Big claims require big evidence, but it is there if you're willing to take the time to examine it.

https://www.technate.org/tiki-index.php?page=Begin

#Technocracy #technate

@CodexArcanum @stux
That's why we need to change to an economic model that does away with money and the whole scarcity mindset. Otherwise it will always be there to hold us back. Technocracy is one that does exactly what you say should be the default.
https://www.technate.org/tiki-index.php?page=Begin

#Technocracy #technate

@MrLee
AI is not going to give us this kind of world you describe, where people are freed from work to pursue their lives and interests. Even putting aside all the problems with modern LLMs, the reason is because we could have had this kind of society now for nearly a century already, just through automation that already exists. But we don't have it, and most people haven't even heard that it is an option. Why? Because it would destroy the structures that keep the rich & powerful, rich & powerful.

What we need to achieve this is a more fundamental change than simply a better or 'real' democracy. The problems run much deeper than simply enacting new laws. The scientists who first devised this kind of future figured out exactly what we must do, and it is described here: https://www.technate.org/tiki-index.php?page=Begin

The best thing we can do democratically is to learn about this system and employ it, because no one is going to do it for us, no government, no savior.

#technocracy #technate

@hosford42
I absolutely agree that the root of the problem is an economic one, and things must be dealt with there in order to be properly fixed. However I don't think that we can reform the market system in a way that will prevent this from happening again. I think that as long as we use a money based system, people will find ways to accumulate it, as well as use it to subvert any laws we enact to prevent it. That's how we got here in the first place. It would only be making things a little better for a little while.

But even if we could do that, our troubles are deeper than that. Because we have long been capable of producing a much higher standard of living for everyone, but continuing to use a scarcity-based economic system, not only have we been simply keeping most people poorer than they need to be, but we have been wasting massive amounts of resources in doing so, resulting in the environmental degradation we are seeing the results of everywhere. We have to ditch the outdated system that is creating artificial scarcity by its very nature and employ a modern, scientific system that was designed for this very problem, that has both sustainability and efficiency built right in. Howard Scott's Technocracy is such a system: https://www.technate.org/tiki-index.php?page=IB28
The result would be no more environmental degradation (by whatever countries use this anyway), no rich or poor classes, a much higher standard of living for everyone, very little work needed to produce that standard of living, and much more.
#Technocracy #Technate