Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
6
debates
41.67%
won
Topic
#5594
Technocracy is a better form of government than Democracy
Status
Voting
The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.
Voting will end in:
00
DD
:
00
HH
:
00
MM
:
00
SS
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 4
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
4
1500
rating
0
debates
0.0%
won
Description
Definition of technocracy-
the government or control of society or industry by an elite of technical experts.
Round 1
Forfeited
Preamble
Salutations, aspiring technocrat! Salutations, cherished reader. I am Vellichor, full-time fool and part-time advocate of democratic ideals.
To supplement my rebuttal, I will support my case in two parts:
1. Power, Justice & Aristocracy Reborn
2. Proof: The Lack & Abundance Of
As PRO has forfeited the first round, I will respectfully yet impatiently await their opening argument before beginning my own.
Burden of Proof
As the instigator, PRO bears the burden of proof. To succeed, PRO must demonstrate that technocracy is a better form of government than democracy. CON seeks to defend the status quo, dispute PRO's claims and demonstrate the flaws in the resolution.
(And to do so in a light-hearted fashion in an effort to be entertaining.)
Definitions
Graciously provided by Merriam-Webster:
Technocracy: Government by technicians, specifically management of society by technical experts.
Democracy: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections.
As to what constitutes a "better" government, I defer to the five key attributes of good governance defined by the Human Rights Council of the United Nations:
1. Transparency.
2. Responsibility.
3. Accountability.
4. Participation.
5. Responsiveness. (To the needs of the people.)
Remarks
I look forward to R2, and I hope you're having a wonderful weekend. May the sun shine brightly through your window.
________________________________________________________________________________
Sources
1. Merriam Webster, for the definitions of both democracy and technocracy.
2. United Nations OHCHR, for the five key attributes of good governance.
3. Chappell Roan, for the music I was listening to while writing this.
Round 2
Forfeited
Rebuttal
N/A.
Power, Justice & Aristocracy Reborn
"The first thing totalitarian leaders do is make sure their voices are the only ones left." - Mattias Desmet
1. Who decides what "expert" means? The experts, of course.
- When those in power decide who isn't allowed to be in power, it creates an unjust system of appointing government officials.
- A technocratic government can decide who they want to be in power. (i.e. the experts are the only ones who can know what an "expert" is.)
- This is describing a different flavour of oligarchy, in which a small group of elites sets their own rules.
- What motivation does such a group have to provide proper government to benefit anyone but themselves? To not retain power for their own means?
In short - a technocratic government has no need to service the people to remain in power, and therefore will not do so.
"Authority should derive from consent of the governed, not from threat of force." - Barbie
2. What if the technocrat is wrong?
- Experts in the field are capable of error, and disagree on important matters constantly.
- "Hotly debated" is such a common phrase in academia that it can be played as a drinking game.
- If the reigning technocrat is wrong, incompetent, corrupt or misguided - to use a historical example, experts once thought smoking was good for you - what recourse does the public have? How does the layman protest against a government that views him as ignorant?
In short - a technocratic government has no need to conscientiously and correctly govern, and therefore will not do so.
"The difference between democracy and oligarchy is poverty and wealth. When the wealthy rule, that is oligarchy. Where the poor rule, that is democracy." - Aristotle
3. How are experts made?
- Exclude, for a moment, the flawed process of expert selection and consider how an expert is made. Consider their background and their inherent bias.
- Wealth and education go hand in hand - more expensive schools are more likely to produce academically successful alumni. Harvard, Yale, etc. A highly-educated technocrat is likely to come from a background of wealth.
- The educational barrier to becoming a politician in a technocratic government is influenced by an individual's wealth. It's likely that members of a technocratic government would be exceptionally wealthy.
- When a small group of wealthy individuals control everything, it's called an plutocracy.
- How can the wealthy be trusted to make decisions that benefit the many - the explicit purpose of governance - with no oversight?
In short - when the few are in charge of the many, the few benefit and the many suffer.
Consider our five key attributes of good governance.
- A technocratic government isn't transparent - it's byzantine in its bureaucracy and has no motivation to make its inner workings available to the layman.
- A technocratic government isn't responsible - experts are chosen by experts, and not elected - who are they responsible to but themselves?
- A technocratic government can't be accountable - what recourse does the layman have against a government that views him as ignorant?
- A technocratic government actively discourages participation - no voting, only a select few can have input, the many are unimportant.
- A technocratic government has isn't responsive to the needs of the people - it is not beholden to them, and therefore more likely to function selfishly.
Remarks
As my opponent appears to have defenestrated themselves from this site, the remainder of this debate will be a rather low-effort affair. If I do have a reader or two, thank you - I hope you've enjoyed my rambling.
________________________________________________________________________________
Sources
1. The Psychology of Totalitarianism, Mattias Desmet, for a killer quote.
2. Toy Story 3, Barbie, for crushing that teddy bear.
3. The Complete Works of Aristotle, Volume 2: The Revised Oxford Translation, p.2031, for the wisdom of the long dead.
Round 3
Forfeited
Rebuttal
Extend.
Proof: The Lack & Abundance Of
"Democracy is the worst form of government except all the others." - Winston Churchill
I think you can see where I was going with this point. Let's just pretend that I've written an eloquent paragraph here.
Remarks
I note that I've made an error in the fifth point of the 'five key attributes of good government' section of my round two - there's an extra word in there that shouldn't be there. I politely offer to take this word from my argument and give it to PRO, which would bring their word count to one. Or four if you count the word FORFEITED three times.
________________________________________________________________________________
Sources
1. Winston Churchill, for his excellent taste in hats and systems of government.
Round 4
Forfeited
Rebuttal
Extend.
Summary: I Love Democracy.
1. A technocratic government isn't beholden to the people it is meant to serve. (See R2.)
2. A technocracy is inherently geared toward servicing the few over the many. (See R2.)
3. A technocratic government doesn't embody the ideals of good governance. (See R2.)
4. Precious little evidence exists to suggest a technocratic government would function, yet alone be better than a democratic government. (See R3.)
Closing Remarks
An unexciting debut. Cherished readers - thank you for your time. Please vote CON.
________________________________________________________________________________
Sources
N/A.
Yeah, I realize that now.
You voted for the wrong person.
Anyone interested?