Technocracy - The Technate of America

 

Technocracy INC.

The 1930s Technocracy Movement —A Pro vs. Con Synopsis

*What it was*: A U.S./Canadian social movement during the Great Depression that wanted to replace elected politicians and the money system with rule by engineers and scientists. Led by Howard Scott and Technocracy Inc., it peaked 1932-1933.

*Core "technique"*: Run North America like one giant, scientific industrial plant called a Technate.

1. *Scrap the price system*: End dollars, banks, and markets. Track everything with "energy accounting" — goods valued by energy used to make them.

2. *Energy certificates*: Citizens get income as certificates good for consumption, not money. Scott proposed $20,000/year for a 4-hour workday.

3. *Scientific management*: "Functional sequences" of technical experts direct all production/distribution to eliminate waste and unemployment.

4. *Continental scope*: Merge North America + parts of Central/South America + Greenland into one self-sufficient techno-state.

*Why it grew*: The Depression made capitalism look failed. Technocrats promised abundance and stability by letting technical experts automate production and plan the economy.

*What happened*: Collapsed by 1933 after economists dismissed it as unscientific. Never gained political power but survived as a fringe group into the 21st century.

---

*Pros — What Supporters Claimed*

- *Efficiency*: Scientific planning could end waste, booms/busts, and resource mismanagement.

- *End unemployment*: Automation + shorter workdays meant jobs for all with more leisure.

- *Post-scarcity goal*: Guarantee basic living standards by distributing abundance from technology.

- *Apolitical*: Remove corruption/partisan gridlock by using technical expertise over politics.

- *Inequality focus*: Highlighted 1930s wealth gaps and pushed debate on federal economic involvement.

*Cons — Criticisms & Problems*

- *Anti-democratic*: Replaces voter choice with unelected experts; critics saw it as a threat to democracy.

- *Unworkable economics*: "Energy accounting" rejected by professional economists; called a "pseudo-scientific hoax" in 1933.

- *Dehumanizing*: Critics like Lyotard warned technocratic rationality ignores human values, culture, and freedom.

- *No political path*: Refused to engage in politics or elections, so it had no way to implement ideas.

- *Oversimplified*: Assumed engineers could solve complex social problems with data alone; ignored incentives, human behavior.

*Bottom line*: Technocracy was a Depression-era utopian blueprint for "rule by engineers." It diagnosed real problems — unemployment, inequality, waste — but its proposed system was too rigid, undemocratic, and economically unsound to work.

Cornell University Library

"This map illustrates "The American Technate," A radical geopolitical proposal by a radical organization based on pseudo-scientific economics and authoritarian, nationalist politics."

Note: 

CBC NEWS: "Elon Musk's maternal grandfather, Joshua Norman Haldeman, was an active leader in the technocracy movement from 1936 to 1941. He served as the leader of the branch in Regina, Saskatchewan. The global headquarters for the broader movement was located in New York City."