Talk:Technocracy

Smyth, William Henry. "'Technocracy'—Ways and Means to Gain Industrial Democracy," Industrial Management (57) 1919. Stabile, Donald R. "Veblen and the Political Economy of the Engineer: the radical thinker and engineering leaders came to technocratic ideas at the xzame time," American Journal of Economics and Sociology (45:1) 1986, 41-52. Veblen, Thornstein. Engineers and the Price System. New York: Viking Press, 1944. Towne, Henry R. "The Engineer as an Economist," Transactions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 1886.

Is expertocracy synonymous with technocracy? While the "See also" section lists numerous related concepts, even possible synonyms and near-synonyms such as noocracy, the relationship between them is not elucidated in the article. --Florian Blaschke (talk) 09:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)

Should Elon Musk's grandfather be mentioned as an early Technocrat? Wasn't a major plan of the technocrats to make Latin America a technocracy? Neither of these subjects is mentioned in the article 70.26.26.4 (talk) 20:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)

See Technocracy movement. – Kaihsu (talk) 17:52, 2 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm thinking about implementing changes to this article with the hope of moving it in the direction of GA status. In its current form, the article is relatively short and heavily focused on historical discussions, which comprise most of the body of the article except for the section "Critiques" and the first paragraph of the section "Characteristics". As a result, many central topics get little to no attention. A common theme in academic discussions of technocracy is its comparison with and relation to other political approaches, such as democracy and populism, so a section or subsection on this topic would be beneficial. The article currently has a section on critical perspectives but lacks a comparable discussion of supporting views, which should also be included to ensure neutrality. The article should also discuss different types of technocracy, such as whether experts directly rule, whether administrative procedures are technocratic, and whether governance relies heavily on technology.

While the Technocracy movement in North America in the 1930s was an important event in the history of technocracy, having a full section on this gives undue weight to a single episode in a much broader historical trajectory. Having a unified history section that treats the technocracy movement as one among many developments would be more balanced. It would be good to have a definition section to explain the different meanings of the term (e.g. as a separate form of government vs as a tendency within other forms of government), key features (e.g. expertise, science, evidence, elitism, value-neutrality), and overlapping terms (e.g. meritocracy and epistocracy). This section could also have a short paragraph on the etymology of the term instead of the current full section on the history of the term, which probably violates WP:PROPORTION. The article also has some rather questionable claims that should probably be removed, such as characterizing Facebook as a "technocratic nation-state".

There are more issues to consider, but they can be addressed later since the points mentioned so far will already involve a lot of work to implement. I was hoping to get some feedback on these ideas and possibly other suggestions. Phlsph7 (talk) 11:39, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

I'm not an expert on this topic but I've been reading a lot about China lately and how it's a perfect example of a technocracy. Not a pure technocracy, but many leaders within the system do have a technical background, unlike what you often see in the West. The difference between democratic plurality and technocratic efficiency might be interesting to see reflected in the article. I see you already thought about that. These two forms often don't go together, because technocracy, in its most optimal form, contains elements such as centralization, long-term planning, and a certain obedience of the people. However, what I explain here doesn't mean that one form is better than the other for governing the people. Both forms have their advantages and disadvantages, and you can't objectively judge one as better than the other. Again I'm not an expert but a very interesting you're planning to overhaul this article and I wish you good luck. Coldbolt (talk) 11:57, 8 February 2026 (UTC)

Hi Coldbolt, thanks for the feedback! I agree that the tension between technocracy and democracy is complex and deserves a better coverage in the article. They are usually treated as competitors but some sources try to reconcile them along the lines that the people choose the goals and the technocrats choose the means of implementation. This will be tricky to cover in a balanced manner since there are also other tensions to consider, like technocracy vs populism, so it will take me some more time to get a better overview of the sources. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:07, 8 February 2026 (UTC)