A Technocracy describes an organizational structure in which decision-makers are selected on the basis of technical expertise and governed by a technical process. Technocracy is a system of government in which decision-makers are elected by the people on the basis of their expertise in a specific area of responsibility, regardless of scientific or technical knowledge.
Less clear is the extent to which Chinese technical experts at the highest levels of government use their technical and economic knowledge, and how they gain access to the political inner circle. In most governments, technocrats are chosen to lead key departments that require specialized skills and experts. Once selected on the basis of their expertise in an area, they will be given government powers.
A government in which elected officials are appointed by experts or professionals to perform individual government functions or recommend laws is considered technocratic. Technocracy is often compared to representative democracy, the idea that elected representatives are the primary decision-makers in government, but technocracy does not mean eliminating elected representatives.
Key Takeaways Technocracy is a form of governance in which government officials and policymakers are chosen by higher authorities based on their technical skills and expertise in a particular area. A technocracy can be a political entity governed by experts (technocrats) selected or appointed by a higher authority. It is a governance model in which decision-makers are selected for office on the basis of their expertise and background.
In summary, a technocracy is a form of government in which policymakers are appointed or elected on the basis of their technical skills and demonstrated performance. Technocracies are governments of technicians guided by the needs of their technology. Technocracy is the form of government in which people with immense knowledge of science and technology are elected to public office in one area.
A clear example would be seen in Technocracy, Inc.’s proposition of replacing the government with technocrats, such as scientists and engineers, with the skills and experience needed to manage the economy. Members of Technocracy, Inc. are committed to moving away from the pricing system and introducing governance functions by technology companies on the North American continent. The term “technocracy” was coined for technocratic or quasi-technocratic ideas involving governance by technical experts and promoted by various individuals and early socialist theorists like Henri Saint-Simon.
This policy influenced the successful development paths of technocratic regimes in Singapore, South Korea, and Taiwan, where new eminent leaders like Deng placed engineers in critical government positions. Technocratic organizations emerged in the United States and Western Canada, but the technocratic movement was weakened by its failure to develop a viable program of change and support that was lost to the New Deal and third-party movements. Since 1978, more and more technical experts have joined the government, creating a limited soft technocracy.
Technocracy is an ideology and a model of government that emphasizes technical skill and efficiency. Its proponents argue that the efficient and rational production and distribution of goods and material abundance is society’s primary and exclusive objective, thus justifying experts in governance. From technocrats ” means-to-end “logic itself, Friedman came to a broad definition of technocracy as a regime of experts and ordinary citizens who claim to know how to solve peoples’ social and economic problems – an assertion that boils down to the conviction that certain politicians care about peoples’ interests and can be trusted to solve their problems.
One of them is Michel Foucault, who appears at the very end of The Power of Knowledge in which technocracy’s main point is that the governance of society is tied to knowledge claims. He seems to be acting in the spirit of Foucault’s concern that the scientific evidence that makes this possible should determine how a technocracy should be governed.
Veblen is listed as one of the members of the Technical Alliance whose members are engineers, scientists, and other technocrats in New York City. The underlying principle of technocracy, which Foucault called the “rise of the art of governance” – in 16th-century Europe, concern for the well-being of the population, including the improvement of social conditions, the increase of prosperity, and the improvement of health – was proposed to broaden the technocratic agenda.
One criticism of technocracy is that it isolates sections of the population from government and uses public resources to implement policies and regulations by technocrats. This problem and this conflict have helped to create populist concepts such as the deep state, made up of a powerful, entrenched, and unaccountable oligarchic technocracy that governs in its own interests. In Europe there is an acute version of this symbiotic relationship between technocracy and populism, not least because the EU is the ultimate experiment in technocratic governance.
In some cases, one way out of this predicament is to appoint a technocratic government, but not all parties support it. If the parties in Parliament cannot agree on how to form a normal government, they could consider supporting a temporary technocratic government. This is the case in the technocratic governments of Greece and Italy because the government is given the mandate to govern as any other government would in a parliamentary system. If you are the prime minister of a major party and head of a technocratic government, and most ministers meet the above definitions, then you are a technocratic prime minister.
Politicians are not particularly good at sharing blame and making the temptation of a number of major parties to undermine a technocratic government for political gain pervasive. Politicians fear that the rise of a powerful virtual technocracy could threaten their governing interests. Mainstream parties that enter technocratic governments do not mean extremist parties.