Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is Canada Re-Embracing Historic Technocracy?
#1
Quote:Is Canada Re-Embracing Historic Technocracy?

In a historically and very accurate accurate description of the 1930s Technocracy movement, the author concludes,  “it would be wrong to dismiss Technocracy Incorporated as just another failed utopian scheme”.

The level of meticulous detail in this article shows the author’s deep understanding of Technocracy, its history and its claims. He sees the modern attraction of libertarian thinking among technocrats and acknowledges the growth or Technocracy while alluding to Technopopulism: “While the number of technocrats in government is on the rise, so, too, is the number of populist politicians who wear their lack of expertise like a badge of honour.”
His anti-populist bias pops out again with the statements: “But there’s been a price for not listening to the experts. Countries run by populist leaders of various shades – particularly the U.S., Brazil and the U.K. – have recorded among the highest COVID-19 death rates.”.
Nevertheless, after exposing the failures and fallacies of Technocracy, Basen concludes that “it would be wrong to dismiss” it. This is a very clever journalistic style that plants the seeds of propaganda deep into the unsuspecting reader’s mind. ⁃ TN Editor

The Great Reset and what progressives have planned for us in a nutshell.
The true purpose of democracy is not to select the best leaders — a clearly debatable obligation — but to facilitate the prompt and peaceful removal of obviously bad ones. 
Reply
#2
I'll admit, the word "Technocracy" is new to me. I'll have to read up on it.
___________________________________________________________________________________________________
All men are frauds. The only difference between them is that some admit it. I myself deny it.
H. L. Mencken
Reply
#3
Just more political jargon to mesmerize the public. look at how pretend history is not real history, and pretend science is not real science:
Quote:In the 1770s, when the use of the spinning jenny became widespread, many weavers who had been spinning cloth by hand from their homes lost their jobs. But the spinning jenny made it cheaper to produce cloth, which meant more people could afford to buy clothes, which meant many more of them were needed to work in the factories where the cloth was now being produced.


This is similar to how schools taught lies that still percolate through them to this day.

In a review of fourth and eighth grade history books, all of them get it wrong. None of them were honest about big government vs. big business. Each book spent much effort painting a picture of successful government monopolies in the Fur trade, building canals and railroads. The historical truth is that these government monopolies were uncontested failures - Failures so severe that the populace rose up in anger, ended the political forces that fed them, and turned them over to successful entrepreneurs. The books all preached to the young that big government was the savior and Robber Barons the nemesis, when in all actuality, it was the opposite that held true.

What caused this was a reliance on the historical works of John L. and Barbara Hammond, who influenced all the school books that followed. They relied on the Sadler Report of 1832 that reported the Industrial Revolution was "crowded with overworked children", "hotbeds of putrid fever," and "monotonous toil in a hell of human cruelty." Charles Dickens' novels helped to codify this image.
Would modern day Liberals feel less secure promoting big government to solve social and economic problems, if they knew in their hearts that what they learned as children was a lie? An historical review by Dr. Burton W. Folsom points out that:

Quote:Mr. Sadler, we know today, lied in his report. He was a member of Parliament and made up much of his report to gain support for a bill he wanted to see Parliament pass. Economist W. H. Hutt has described Sadler's falsification of evidence. Even Friedrich Engels, comrade of Karl Marx, concluded that "Sadler permitted himself to be betrayed by his noble enthusiasm into the most distorted and erroneous statements."

The history of our country is clear: It was the government that charged outrageous prices and tried to pawn off shoddy merchandise, while the private businesses that supplanted them did the job right, charged lower prices, and did it without government subsidies that kept the monopolies afloat.
Folsom Wrote:The school books give the impression that robber barons stepped in to exploit whatever they could, and were a negative point in history. The lesson the books should be teaching is that in the world of commerce, the profit motive, the structure of incentives. and the stifling tendencies of bureaucrats are such that those businesses run by entrepreneurs will consistently outperform those run by the government. Instead, the authors had a bias for a strong central government. When the authors were called on these reports, they agreed that they were not reporting fact, but incorrect, unsubstantiated ideology.

So, in other words, the technocracy crowd is more of the same. Like Fauci, pretending to be on the side of science doesn't work when it is not science being cited.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)