The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
The complexity involved should only allow technocrats in the temples - so the question becomes, do we have faith in technocrats to lead us through the desert?
The point of technocrats is that they try to rely on facts and can be checked by other technocrats and experts, which is how technocrats and experts are supposed to work (i.e. with respect, if not to "truth" at least to the scientific method which allows for verification and the weeding of false ideas and opinions).
And even in energy there are hard facts. It is in fact rather easy to distinguish between hard facts, assumptions about the future, and political preferences - for example, the capacity factor of a plan is a fact, the price of gas in 10-years time is a guesstimate and the discount rate used to value a kWh produced in 10 years' time is a political choice. Wind power
That word is pure undistilled propaganda. The reality is they're Money Party apparatchiks and they'll do what apparatchiks always do - repeat the Party line word for word.
With the exception of Merkel, who - unforgivably - has a physics PhD, I suspect most of the rest can barely operate a TV remote.
The French Grandes-Écoles system is one big technocrat/functionary/apparatchik factory. Trichet is a prime example of its output. Unlike Draghi he hasn't actually ever worked for the private sector so it's not obvious why he should be classed as a "money party apparatchik". guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
Anything to do with economics or money falls at the first hurdle, because economics and money are primarily political - which is to say they're about power for its own sake, and not about the common good, or social improvement, or reality-based decision making, or any of those other fine things.
After a token start in engineering - with management and social science - Trichet's education was almost entirely political, so I'm not sure why you think he's a technocrat. (Being labelled as such in the press hardly counts, of course.)
A true technocrat would have spent a significant part of their career building stuff that works and/or doesn't fall down. Most of the so-called technocrats have never come close to this - with predictably hilarious consequences.
- Jake If you only spend 20 minutes of the rest of your life on economics, go spend them here.
And, like I said in a parallel comment, it's obvious that this can be ascertained with the naked eye. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
But apparently it's equally not obvious that practical politics is mostly about lying and making shit up for personal gain, that there really isn't much else going on, and that the only consequences that matter are the ones that lead to personal gain for a tiny minority of the population.
If something keeps happening, and the same people keep benefiting from it, why are we still discussing whether it's deliberate and not some freak entirely accidental byproduct of poor reasoning skills?
I'd note that our power systems seem to be better managed and provide cheaper electricity (externalities are something else) when they are run by engineers rather than politicians/lawyers/MBAs. Wind power
That may work just fine for technocrats, because it can be ignored as marginal noise, but for a society at large, I find it pretty depressing.
Secondly, hard facts are one things. It's what people do with them that concerns me.
Honestly, most of his ideas were either dangerous, misleading, or just plain wrong - not just in a basic sense of not matching reality, but in the much more slippery sense of being seductively appealing and rhetorically influential, to the extent they sent the West off in some very self-destructive directions.
You could make a good case for the current crisis being a perfect example of self-styled philosopher kings believing they know what's best for everyone else, while talking and thinking utter nonsense.
I'm just saying that people with Engineering degrees extolling the virtues of Technocracy in itself rather than as it actually exists sounds definitely Platonic to me. guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
If anything, engineers mostly don't get politics because they assume everyone else on the planet is either already an engineer or should learn to think like one.
The reality - which is that some people people are trained to think like liars and thieves, and that these people run the planet - isn't an inconvenient truth you'll find on most engineering courses.
Which is why Engineers are mostly unfit for governing human beings.
Why are we talking about Technocracy, again? guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by DoDo - May 20 23 comments
by Nomad - May 10 14 comments
by JakeS - May 15 7 comments
by Metatone - May 14 85 comments
by ARGeezer - May 16 15 comments
by gmoke - May 17 2 comments
by DoDo - May 12 11 comments
by Migeru - May 6 100 comments
by DoDo - May 2023 comments
by gmoke - May 172 comments
by ARGeezer - May 1615 comments
by JakeS - May 157 comments
by Metatone - May 1485 comments
by DoDo - May 1211 comments
by Nomad - May 1014 comments
by Migeru - May 78 comments
by marco - May 782 comments
by Migeru - May 6100 comments
by Ted Welch - May 35 comments
by afew - May 340 comments
by ceebs - May 26 comments
by gmoke - Apr 301 comment
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 3067 comments
by joelado - Apr 2954 comments
by Metatone - Apr 2854 comments
by ATinNM - Apr 275 comments
by ceebs - Apr 265 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Apr 2686 comments