Understanding the Link Between Technocracy and Authoritarianism
The Historical Connection
In the era of the Coronavirus, we are often encouraged to listen to the advice of "experts." However, it's crucial to remember the historical relationship between technocracy and authoritarianism. As the ideal of a truly representative democracy took center stage in European and American life at the end of the 19th century, those who stood to lose power under this new social order began promoting the idea of a superior modern wisdom that would save us from the inherent messiness and inefficiency of a government by and for the people.
Spain's Role in Technocracy
Interestingly, Spain played a significant role in the development of this ideological current. During the 1920s and 1930s, it took on a form known as "anti-parliamentarianism," which held that only a class of military patriots, free from ideology, could save the country from the stagnation and corruption generated by party politics.
Shift from Military to Science
Following the Spanish Civil War and World War II, when the idea of social salvation by men in uniform had lost much of its appeal, these efforts shifted their focus from the military to men of science. The term technocrat first came into wide usage in the late 1950s when Spanish dictator Francisco Franco entrusted the management of his country’s economy to a group of thinkers from the ultra-right-wing Catholic organization Opus Dei.
The Illusion of Objectivity
The central conceit of technocratic thought is that there exists in data-based, scientific knowledge a clarity that, if properly applied, will free us from all types of unproductive debate. However, those who collect and interpret data are social beings, and therefore political beings, and thus, by definition, non-objective in their selection and deployment of the "facts." This makes their claim of being above politics dangerously deceptive for society.
Technocracy and the Internet
There is perhaps no clearer example of this than recent campaigns to free the internet from so-called "fake news" and supposed efforts to "incite violence." In reality, truth, especially truth in socially-nested acts and political positions only ever exists in approximate form. And yet, we now have companies tied to the US-EU-Israeli axis of military and business power telling us that they have algorithms that can free us from that inherent messiness by eliminating "fake news" from our screens.
Questioning the Objectivity of Algorithms
In regard to the aim of freeing us from hate speech and incitement to violence, is it really objectively true that singing the praises of, say Hezbollah, is inherently more an incitement to violence than praising the US military? And then there is the not-so-small matter of numbers of people maimed and killed. When we look at the statistics side-by-side there is not even a shadow of a doubt as to who has killed or maimed more people in the Middle East.
Disparate Treatment of Fighting Forces
Yet, this grossly disparate treatment of two fighting forces, which can only be explained in terms of the embedded ideological predilections of those running the operation, is consistently presented to us in the language of above-the-fray technical neutrality. This acceptance of technocratic control over discourse is perhaps the most frightening aspect of it all.
Bottom Line
If we truly value democracy, we cannot passively accept the ethos of technocratic management that our politicians and their media servants are now relentlessly pushing upon us. It's time to question the objectivity of these technocratic controls and consider their implications for our society. What are your thoughts on this matter? Share this article with your friends and sign up for the Daily Briefing, delivered every day at 6pm.
