Work In Progress

"This page isn't even complete yet, who cares?" - Nihilism
Someone is currently working on this page. Please do not interfere with their work.

Self Insert

"People can really believe anything these days!" - Ismism
This page is meant to represent Metanoia's political views. Please do not make any major edits without their permission.

"Let the wise lead, the skilled build, and the strong execute."

Plato (Modified)

Meritocratic Technocracy: The Future of Rational Governance

Meritocratic Technocracy is an ideology that advocates for governance by qualified experts and specialists rather than career politicians or populist leaders. It emphasizes rational decision-making, scientific governance, and strategic long-term planning to create an optimized, efficient, and technologically advanced society.

Core Principles of Meritocratic Technocracy

Meritocratic Technocracy is built on three foundational principles, heavily inspired by Enlightenment rationalism, classical technocracy, and modern governance models.

1st Principle - Rule by the Capable

Meritocratic Technocracy rejects the notion of rule by birthright, popularity, or political favoritism. Instead, it supports a governance structure where the most competent individuals, based on expertise and proven ability, lead society.

• Leaders must be technically and intellectually qualified to govern.
• Political power is granted based on scientific, economic, and technological expertise, not ideological leanings.
• Decision-making is driven by data analysis, logic, and efficiency rather than emotional appeal or mass influence.

2nd Principle - Data-Driven Governance

Governance under Meritocratic Technocracy is guided by empirical data, artificial intelligence, and rational methodologies. Every policy and law is evaluated based on effectiveness, sustainability, and societal impact.

• Government functions like a highly efficient corporation, eliminating waste and corruption.
• AI and machine learning assist in policy analysis, economic modeling, and infrastructure management.
• Experts, not politicians, dictate policy directions in areas such as healthcare, defense, and economy.
• National progress is measured through scientific indicators, not political ideologies.

3rd Principle - Long-Term Societal Planning

Unlike short-sighted electoral politics, Meritocratic Technocracy prioritizes long-term national interests over temporary public approval.

• Strategic planning is conducted on decades-long scales, ensuring future stability.
• Focus on sustainable energy, AI-driven economic growth, and technological self-sufficiency.
• Removes short-term populist incentives that lead to reckless economic and social policies.
• Education and research are prioritized as the backbone of national development.

Structure of a Meritocratic Technocracy

Meritocratic Technocracy proposes a hybrid structure, where governance is optimized through a blend of centralized efficiency and decentralized expertise.

Political Structure:

• Executive Leadership – Led by a council of experts in various fields, selected based on proven competence.
• AI-Assisted Decision-Making – Machine learning algorithms process national data to assist policymakers.
• Performance-Based Governance – Ministers and officials are evaluated on objective results, with positions awarded or revoked based on competence.
• Public Consultation Panels – While direct democracy is inefficient, qualified citizen panels provide structured public input.

Likes and Dislikes of Meritocratic Technocracy

✅ Likes

✅ Expert Governance – Leadership by the most intelligent, skilled, and knowledgeable individuals.

✅ Scientific Advancement – Heavy focus on technology, research, and AI-driven progress.

✅ Efficient Governance – A system that eliminates bureaucratic inefficiencies and corruption.

✅ Long-Term Planning – A future-focused society that prepares decades ahead.

✅ Education & Intellectualism – Encourages lifelong learning and knowledge supremacy.

❌ Dislikes

❌ Populism & Mass Manipulation – Emotion-driven politics that ignores rational policy-making.

❌ Corruption & Nepotism – Unqualified leadership chosen by family ties, wealth, or political favoritism.

❌ Short-Termism – Politicians prioritizing reelection over national progress.

❌ Anti-Science Sentiment – Rejection of expert knowledge, reason, and technological progress.

Relationships (WIP)

Very Positive

Technocracy – The foundation of Meritocratic Technocracy. Rule by experts ensures optimal decision-making and scientific progress.

Meritocracy – Leadership should be earned through competence, not birthright or popularity.

Singapore Model – A highly efficient blend of technocratic governance, economic pragmatism, and long-term national planning.

Cyberocracy – AI-assisted governance aligns with Meritocratic Technocracy’s goal of data-driven policy-making.

Scientific Socialism – A form of socialism that prioritizes rational economic planning and technological advancement over ideology.

Positive

Georgism – Land Value Tax is efficient, but its focus on land reform over technocratic expertise makes it incomplete.

Ordo-Liberalism – A regulated free market with strong institutions is efficient, but democracy can undermine expert leadership.

State Capitalism – Centralized economic control aligns with long-term planning, but political corruption is a risk.

Technocratic Fascism - While it values order and efficiency, the lack of intellectual pluralism hinders rational progress.

E-Democracy – Structured citizen input is useful, but uneducated mass decision-making undermines governance.

Futurism – Support for technology and progress is good, but extreme cultural change can be destabilizing.

Neutral/Mixed

Neoliberalism – Supports free markets and innovation, but corporate lobbying and short-term profit focus interfere with rational governance.

Libertarian Paternalism – "Nudging" people toward good choices aligns with policy guidance, but lack of firm control risks inefficiency.

Social Democracy – Supports education and welfare, but populist politics and high taxation lead to inefficiency.

Enlightened Absolutism – Strong central rule aligns with expert governance, but hereditary rulers are inefficient.

Progressivism – Encourages scientific progress, but emotional decision-making can undermine rational policies.

Negative

Libertarianism – Rejects state-led planning, allowing unqualified individuals to dictate policies.

Minarchism – Minimal government structure fails to provide necessary technocratic oversight.

Market Anarchism – An ungoverned free market leads to monopolies, economic instability, and lack of long-term planning.

Anarcho-Capitalism – Rejects structured governance, making rational state-led progress impossible.

Populism – Prioritizes emotions and mass opinion over expertise, leading to irrational decision-making.

Traditional Conservatism – Clings to outdated values instead of embracing scientific advancement.

Nationalism – Identity-based politics interfere with rational and inclusive governance.

Very Negative

Democratic Socialism – Mass governance prevents efficient, expert-driven decision-making.

Communism – Over-centralization of the economy leads to inefficiency and lack of meritocratic incentives.

Anarchism – Total lack of government prevents technological and bureaucratic efficiency.

Reactionary Traditionalism – Rejects progress and rational governance in favor of irrational traditions.

Fascism – Rejects intellectual meritocracy in favor of irrational nationalism and authoritarianism.

Theocracy – Religion-based governance tends to be anti-scientific and anti-rational.

Mauricioism: I’m not gonna lie, my view on your ideology is mixed (mostly negative). I agree with you on economic efficiency, scientific progress, and rational governance, but the libertarian anti-authoritarianism, direct democracy, and extreme individualism of it makes it too chaotic, individualistic, and anti-structural imo. But you’re a nice guy, and thanks for being the first commenter on my page!
Neoradical Liberalism: Again, like above, my view on your ideology is also mixed but mostly negative. This is because of its reliance on mass democracy, populist tendencies, and emphasis on absolute individual liberties. However, the parts I do appreciate about it are its focus on economic efficiency, rational governance, and technological advancement. Also, thanks for adding me on your page and commenting on mine
Template:KK: Like the two above, I’d place my view on your ideology as mixed to negative. I see it as a pragmatic but flawed system, incorporating too much democratic inefficiency and social populism while thankfully still retaining some technocratic and economic pragmatism. Thanks for commenting on my page btw

Comments

• Mauricioism - Add me?
  • Sure, just let me add relations (still pretty WIP page)
• Radical Republicanism - Add me?
  • Sure! Thanks for also adding me on your page btw
• Template:KK - Add me
  • Sure thing. Thanks for commenting
•  Dark Minarchism - wait dont add me yet ill tell you when im done
  • Alright, I got you.
• Midskism - Add me?
  • Definitely, cool seeing you here
• Floral Republicanism - You should like, totally add me!
  • I think you’re right!
• Andrionism - Add me.
• Center-LibLeft Syncretism - hey man, just letting you know I finished adding yours!