The Technocratic Rape of Science
The Rise of the Social Scientific Dictatorship and the Mechanization of Man
“Technocracy.” You've probably come across the term quite frequently in recent times. It's a buzzword that's tossed around in various circles, but many people lack a comprehensive grasp of its origins, significance, and its connection to the idea of social engineering, where your personal autonomy may be overshadowed by the influence of a ruling elite. This article aims to shed light on these aspects and provide a deeper understanding of technocracy, delve into the rise of Malthusianism and pull on Darwin's beard by shining light on the intersection of sociology and evolutionary theory, which manifested in eugenics, genocide, imperialism, state socialism, and technological segregation - all with only one goal in mind: making you the perfect slave.
In numerous ways, epistemology bears a striking resemblance to an economic system. When the right intellectual authorities hold sway in key positions, they can arbitrarily confer epistemological dominance upon paradigms that align with social and political expediency. In such an environment of epistemological suppression, academic and institutional barriers act as obstacles, preventing potential competitors from entering the marketplace of ideas. Concurrently, a self-proclaimed cognitive elite seizes a monopoly over the realm of popular thought. This knowledge oligopoly essentially forms an epistemological cartel, championing its favored ideologues while stifling dissenting voices.
In the bygone power structures of antiquity, theocratic establishments, sanctioned by the state, effectively operated as epistemological cartels. Notable instances include the Pharisees who orchestrated the crucifixion of Jesus Christ and the Mystery cults of Mesopotamia. In both cases, a select few wielded strict control over what was considered knowable, all the while upholding the socioeconomic dominance of political oligarchs. In their authoritarian marketplace of ideas, concepts like “liberty” and “human dignity” held no value.
Nonetheless, this state of affairs was destined to evolve. As the religious institutions of the ruling elite lost credibility among the masses, it became evident that these oligarchs would need to transition to a more secular system of control. The outcome of this transformation was the rise of what Aldous Huxley termed a “scientific dictatorship.” Huxley elaborates:
“The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles, and mysteries. Under a scientific dictatorship, education will really work with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.”-Brave New World Revisited
Fundamentally, the scientific dictatorship can be likened to a theocracy built upon the faith of scientism. Scientism embodies epistemological imperialism, advocating the universal imposition of scientific principles across all fields of study. Undoubtedly, a significant portion of modern intellectuals may view this widespread application of science as favorable. After all, science has played a pivotal role in the technological advancement of human civilization. It has harnessed electricity through innovations like the light bulb, eradicated diseases, and explored space using rockets. It is reasonable to assume that such a potent force could similarly enhance the human condition when directed towards questions of history, morality, and governance.
Nevertheless, the contemporary mindset, often constrained by its fixation on the present, tends to overlook a substantial limitation within the investigative methods of science. Michael Hoffman sheds light on this limitation:
The reason that science is a bad master and dangerous servant and ought not to be worshipped is that science is not objective. Science is fundamentally about the uses of measurement. What does not fit the yardstick of the scientist is discarded. Scientific determinism has repeatedly excluded some data from its measurement and fudged other data, such as Piltdown Man, in order to support the self-fulfilling nature of its own agenda, be it Darwinism or ‘cut, burn and poison’ methods of cancer ‘treatment.’”
Certainly, as a framework primarily focused on quantification, science can only address entities that are amenable to quantification. Anything that eludes measurement is inherently excluded. This leads to a disquieting query: What, precisely, falls outside the purview of a solely scientific perspective? The response to this question can be found in “The Report from Iron Mountain,” a purported document originating from a clandestine government think tank:
“Previous studies have taken the desirability of peace, the importance of human life, the superiority of democratic institutions, the greatest ‘good’ for the greatest number, the ‘dignity’ of the individual, and other such wishful premises as axiomatic values necessary for the justification of a study of peace issues. We have not found them so. We have attempted to apply the standards of physical science to our thinking, the principal characteristic of which is not quantification, as is popularly believed, but that, in Whitehead’s words, ‘…it ignores all judgments of value; for instance, all esthetic and moral judgments.’”
An exclusively scientific approach discards all “inherent values.” The “aesthetic and ethical judgments” that safeguard human essence are entirely disregarded in a purely scientistic society. In fact, humanity itself must undergo transformation. Because the human aspect poses a challenge in a state governed by a quantification system, that particular facet of human existence must be eradicated. A scientific dictatorship demands a scientific entity. Naturally, such a entity would no longer be considered human in any meaningful sense, and this aligns precisely with the objectives of the social engineers behind the scientific dictatorship – to fashion a mechanical entity, or as Adam Weishaupt, founder of the Illuminati, phrased it, the “Maschinenmenschen.”
Not everything can be free, unfortunately. And writing an 8000 word article takes more time than you think.
Your support as a paid subscriber enables me to continue producing high-quality, independent journalism on this important topics. As an ad-free platform, I rely on the support of my readers to keep this content accessible and free from external influence.