Turn on thread page Beta

Technocracy: When your country is ruled by scientists watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    they'd quickly be voted out by the irrational electorate.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    It wouldn't last as long as there's a tabloid media in this country - scientists only really know how to spin ideas to other scientists and not people who aren't generally scientifically literate. Consequently, good ideas like the legalisation of marijuana (indeed, of all drugs, with tax as a control to fund health costs), vastly increasing our protection of the environment, rolling out a maglev network, etc. would all come under fire from the stupid press pandering to the masses's love of a good government bashing (moral bankruptcy in the first policy's case, nanny statism in the second, big government spending too much money in the third)

    But get rid of the tabloid media (keep the BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and the four broadsheets) and I suspect technocracy could be a resounding success. As a start, I would dearly love for scientists and engineers to be seriously involved in shaping, say, environmental and transport policy, and we could go from there :moon:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chivalry)
    I still imagine Lord Mandelson ruling the country in an emperor ming costume. It haunts my dreams... >.>
    :rofl:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Spetznaaz)
    I think you are right.

    We are not even run by the people we think we are run by.. they are just puppets.
    Very Much Agreed!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Great thought! *Watching this thread*
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Well firstly scientific research would not be held back so much on 'morality' grounds.
    Remember the fuss kicked up about the LHC because of people who don't know what they're talking about are believed? That probably wouldn't happen.

    Policies would be efficient, perhaps considered ruthless by many, but they would work well in the long run.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Liam Fox has a medical degree and yet still seems to want to slaughter Muslims.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    X
    Agree. However, I can't help but wondering why the majority of TSRs would second the legalisation of marijuana. Maybe I live in a different culture here, I can't understand the reasons for it. :s

    p/s or maybe i haven't tried one lolz
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by manthew)
    Agree. However, I can't help but wondering why the majority of TSRs would second the legalisation of marijuana. Maybe I live in a different culture here, I can't understand the reasons for it. :s

    p/s or maybe i haven't tried one lolz
    Because there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates it is a serious health hazard, and because treating it as a criminal issue rather than a public health issue only serves to create a ridiculous amount of crime, as it does with all drugs.

    Drugs should be out in the open for all to see and use if they wish. From that we can tax it's users to provide for healthcare measures, like we do with smokers who already more than pay for the costs of their treatment.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    Because there is no scientific evidence that demonstrates it is a serious health hazard, and because treating it as a criminal issue rather than a public health issue only serves to create a ridiculous amount of crime, as it does with all drugs.

    Drugs should be out in the open for all to see and use if they wish. From that we can tax it's users to provide for healthcare measures, like we do with smokers who already more than pay for the costs of their treatment.
    Interesting. Hahas

    Intriguingly in Malaysia, government generalised all types of drug into a single meaning, 'drug' (dadah). If one does not have enough exposure to mass media or foreign culture, he would not know what is marijuana because it has been classified as drug in Malaysia. And carrying carry 'dugs' is criminalised and the punishment is no lesser than capital punishment.

    Tbh, it is until today, I realised cannabis itself has less health effect than tobacco, which is legalised in Malaysia.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'd imagine there wouldn't be a lot of arts funding.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kronstadt)
    I'd imagine there wouldn't be a lot of arts funding.
    In a technocracy, artists would have control/influence over arts funding
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    I really don't see how people can be so sure what a hypothetical government made up of science graduates would do on such specific issues as they're making out. :rolleyes:

    By the time people enter politics, it has usually been a long time since their days at uni so whether they did science or a humanity or whatever, they'll have been involved in politics for a long time and probably wouldn't be much different to our current political class, across the spectrum.

    PS. Soft drugs aren't not being legalised because the government is not aware of the scientific consensus concerning their effects. :facepalm2:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aphotic Cosmos)
    In a technocracy, artists would have control/influence over arts funding
    Well then a technocracy probably wouldnt' be too bad. It would certainly be better then the current system, anyway. I mean, if politicians had to actually prove their ideologies and policies scientifically, things would be pretty different to what they are now...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kronstadt)
    Well then a technocracy probably wouldnt' be too bad. It would certainly be better then the current system, anyway. I mean, if politicians had to actually prove their ideologies and policies scientifically, things would be pretty different to what they are now...
    :ditto:
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    How about a gynocracy?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Point out a few facts

    1. Thatcher had a degree in Chemistry, but she was seen as a good leader by many, but hated by many. Saying that she did change a lot.
    2. A lot of Economics can be done by Physicists and Mathematician. Key ideas from Physics are really improtant in Economics like Bromian motion or heat equations. Game theory is a central idear of Economics and that is based on the work of Mathematician such as Neumann and Nash.
    3. You can get good leaders of Science, that could lead the country. I think Feynman would have made a good president of America, he would be popular aswell and well respected.


    Now a bit of conjecture. I think as time goes on since technological capacity increases, the people in charge would have to become more like Scientist and be filled up with Scientists.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is most responsible for your success at university
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.