Technocracy is a better form of government than Democracy

"The first thing totalitarian leaders do is make sure their voices are the only ones left." - Mattias Desmet

• 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?
  

"Authority should derive from consent of the governed, not from threat of force." - Barbie

• 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?
  

"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

• 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?
  

1. 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.
   
2. A technocratic government isn't responsible - experts are chosen by experts, and not elected - who are they responsible to but themselves?
   
3. A technocratic government can't be accountable - what recourse does the layman have against a government that views him as ignorant?
   
4. A technocratic government actively discourages participation - no voting, only a select few can have input, the many are unimportant.
   
5. 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.