Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Understanding Technocracy

Understanding Technocracy

Ratings: (0)|Views: 66|Likes:
Published by CarlCord
The Zeitgeist, Venus and Technocracy Movements in their own words.
Selected extracts.
The Zeitgeist, Venus and Technocracy Movements in their own words.
Selected extracts.

More info:

Published by: CarlCord on Jan 03, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Selected writings b
Page 1 of 17
the Zeitgeist Movement and the Ven
us Project.
Page 2 of 17
Selected writings by the Zeitgeist Movement and the Venus Project.This document is selected capture on the concept Cybernation to be deployed by the ZeitgeistMovement and its activist arm the Venus Project. Given the lack of exposure and failure to citeofficial documentation by the technocratic movement at large , it is required toResources accessed on 3 January 2012
A Case for Social Cybernation
http://tzmblog.zeitgeistitalia.org/en/blog/tom-skazinski/case-social-cybernation Submitted by Tom Skazinski, published on Thu, 07/28/2011 - 22:13
Let us ponder and inspect the idea of a socio-economic paradigm shift, and plot a socialdirection with the help of social nation. Democracy, a loaded word, has a lot of connotations and ideologies associated with it; but what does it really mean? And, moreimportantly, how does it manifest in our current society?
The ideological purpose of democracy is for everyone to participate–for the governing powerto derive from the people. Unfortunately, when we inspect today’s culture and the governinginstitutions, this ideological premise is questioned.Take the various democracy governments around the globe today–they exist as entitiesoperated by groups of individuals that people elect to power.The government needs to balance its budget, grow its GDP, uphold a framework of rules andlaws of the land, and compete in the world marketplace in order to satisfy its interests. Youwould assume its interests to be that of serving its citizens’ collective needs and foster ahealthy environment that creates incentives and motivates individuals to contribute towardsthe betterment of the social collective.
Page 3 of 17
That is the theory behind what our current monetary paradigm system is trying to achieve: if you satisfy your own needs and desires by earning income, you are contributing to thebetterment of society as a whole.This is the staple and structure of today’s mentality – it is why we have jobs, why we havepersonal property, it is what the culture promotes, and what we don’t question but assume isthe golden rule of how society is to function.
This is the basis for the structure of today’s mentality: it is why we have jobs; it is why we havepersonal property; it is what the culture promotes; and it is what we don’t question, but assume is thegolden rule of how society is to function.
Although this mentality or framework has some positive aspects–it will change: not becauseof some prediction or because of a growing enlightenment about alternatives that in theorywould work better; but because simply put–our current paradigm is not sustainable.[…]
No longer can our idealistic-democracy-driven government serve its citizens when itslifeline and existence is threatened by the continuing requirement for sustainingexponential consumption with no regard to nature’s limits, no regard to the wellness of its citizens, no regard to solving problems if these were to disrupt the generation of profit.
This monetary paradigm is the greatest threat against which our species has ever had tocontended, and will be viewed by future generations as the greatest obstacle we had toovercome in order to progress and mature as a species.Would a paradigm shift of the modern socio-economic-democracy ideology towards socialcybernation a rational alternative? Do we even know if it’s even feasible and sustainable?As a computer scientist I look at this problem from an informational systems theoryapproach, there exists an infinite solution space of frameworks that tackles the issue at hand;a framework is a series or rules and standards with which we can organize our society. Oursociety runs on a massive collection of rules and standards, either assumed, or inferred fromthe past, or planned out and enforced by law.[…]So shouldn’t we collectively prioritize that the most influential aspect of our existence andthe long term sustainability of our species be forever improving? and shouldn’t we becontinually optimizing this set of rules and standards?But, in our current society, does the average person even contemplate this? or do we assumethis is the way things are; then, so be it? I’m just an individual playing out my life in thecurrent set or rules and standards; that’s the way it is.

Activity (14)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
Howard Scott is the man, the genius, who first recognized the physical basis of social change, the laws of physical change in human society. He applied the scientific method to the study of social phenomena and the social mechanism, substituting a 'metrical' for a 'value' interpretation.
The concept of "rational consensus" is philosophic in origin and, as we have seen, has no basis in scientific fact. Science is a methodology for the determination of the most probable based upon an analysis of the facts of the matter. A fact is a close agreement of a series of observations of the same phenomenon.
They do not distinguish between the field of science and that which pertains to axiology, the study of values, their unique forms and interrelationships. One of Fresco´s main stated goals is bringing about a "universal change in values". This contrasts sharply with Technocracy Inc.´s most basic postulate; The phenomena involved in the functional operation of a social mechanism are measurable.
They believe the use of Technocracy Inc.´s Universal Identity Card, also known as the Distribution Certificate, is not necessary because they claim that in their system, resources would be so abundant there will be no need for an accounting system to keep track of them.
They do not advocate a program of scientific population control as does Technocracy Inc. with its program of technological compulsion. They believe an educated population does not need a program of population control. Technocracy Inc. warns that any program that relies upon voluntary human self-regulation is doomed to failure.
The Zeitgeist Movement and the Venus Project pretend to have a world program and not a Continentalism as does Technocracy Inc., which is an American program born of America´s problems. One of the basic Technocracy Inc. postulates is: Any and all social problems are solvable by the technological application of scientific principles on a Continental scale.
Technocracy starts out with the facts at hand which indicate what the next most probable state of society will be, and whether that state will be desirable from the standpoint of people's opinions or not, has nothing to do with the question. However, and fortunately, it all seems to be highly desirable, even to the most skeptical.
All Utopian states in the past have been formulated by dreamers who started out by postulating what they thought would be the best or more desirable.
Technocracy is truly a unique organization. Many organizations study society as to what if any changes are necessary to assure it has a high morality. Technocracy, however, is the only - and let me hasten to emphasize the only organization - that study society from a scientific perspective, using the scientific method.

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->