Nathan:
> What a terrible technocratic view of democracy.
>I like representative systems where
> the experts are restrained by periodic review by dumb-shit
> political representatives who need it all explained in small
> words. It keeps technocracy from running too much amok.
-You seem to mix up two kinds of experts - those who are placed in th -eposition of authority and thus everything they sai passess for words of -"wisdom" and those who have the skills and ability to critically examine -facts presented to them.
No-- I meant technocracy in the best sense of the word, your group that has "skills and ability." But not all social concerns are likely to be embodied in those who also have a particular set of skills. Should technology be designed in a market libertarian manner just because the social preference of computer programmers tend to group that direction? How technology or other expertise is deployed is not some value-neutral endeavor.
And it is on those social concerns that dumb-shit "self-righteous, ignorant masses" should be able to "disregard experts"
>You certainly would want the doctor who operates
>on you or the pilot in the cockpit of your plane to be appointed to ther
>positions by testing of their expertise rather than elected by a
>popularity contest.
No, but I sure don't want doctors to make all decisions about health care systems or pilots to decide how airline systems are designed.
-- Nathan Newman