To inform and educate the public that there is abundance available if we approach our economy correctly.
To serve local and global communities by providing an informational network in support of a functional and thriving planet.
To collaborate and cooperate with individuals and organizations to incorporate scientific research and ideas that will allow a sustainable system of production and distribution that does not harm the environment, creates a stable economy, and allows access to support systems in a non-discriminatory basis.
To empower the public toward new approaches to sustainable systems.
How should we feel about the abolishment of public and private property? This is too simple on it’s own, and could have more conversation onto specifics, but a general thesis:
-If the property could or does generate capital, then it is collective property. (not government owned, opposed to public property, lets say.)
-If it does not generate capital, then in general it can be owned by an individual. I.E. a P.C., A home, a car, et cetera.
There can be democratic debate into things like roads, water systems, forests, so maybe some public property can be tolerated. I strongly believe we technocrats can gain traction with the public if we impose these ideas into our circles. If we are accused of socialism, then perhaps so be it. This may seem emotional or comic, but personally I see no reason beyond belief to possibly prefer private ownership over the ownership of those who work and maintain these such properties, as even a human being. For it can beautifully hyper-size the civil and financial liberties for those of North America, and then those of Earth herself.
Hello, I am interested in the concept of Technocracy Inc. and I would like to know more about your intentions and how you plan to go about them. I would also like to know what you consider yourselves to be (ie; a movement or political entity) and how I could get involved if I decide to “join”.
How should we feel about the abolishment of public and private property? This is too simple on it’s own, and could have more conversation onto specifics, but a general thesis:
-If the property could or does generate capital, then it is collective property. (not government owned, opposed to public property, lets say.)
-If it does not generate capital, then in general it can be owned by an individual. I.E. a P.C., A home, a car, et cetera.
There can be democratic debate into things like roads, water systems, forests, so maybe some public property can be tolerated. I strongly believe we technocrats can gain traction with the public if we impose these ideas into our circles. If we are accused of socialism, then perhaps so be it. This may seem emotional or comic, but personally I see no reason beyond belief to possibly prefer private ownership over the ownership of those who work and maintain these such properties, as even a human being. For it can beautifully hyper-size the civil and financial liberties for those of North America, and then those of Earth herself.
This movement is the future of the world
Yes Technocracy is the future and is friendly, keep up the good work.
Hello, I am interested in the concept of Technocracy Inc. and I would like to know more about your intentions and how you plan to go about them. I would also like to know what you consider yourselves to be (ie; a movement or political entity) and how I could get involved if I decide to “join”.
I’m glad to see the new website up and running.