Technocracy as a challenge to political freedom in the digital age

In: Hrani: naukovo-teoretyčnyj alʹmanach, Band 24, Heft 4, S. 31-37

Abstract

The government of the former Prime-Minister of Ukraine Olexiy Honcharuk named itself "the government of technocrats". This shows that the concept of technocracy becomes attractive in Ukraine. Technocracy is the form of government, which attempts to distance itself from political representation or affiliation with a particular ideology. Technocrats derive their legitimacy from their skills and expertise, and focus primarily on problem-solving and optimizing the society's useful functions. Technocracy has always been a promising political concept. The Republic by Plato can be regarded as the first attempt to substantiate a technocratic society, in which power proceeds from the expertise of its dominant elite. Technocracy was very appealing in the industrial age, when scientific management of factories inspired the idea that society at large could be governed by similar methods. Today, digital technologies and Big Data reinvigorate the technocratic project. In this article it has been shown that technocracy, if taken too far, can be antithetical to liberal democracy and its core value – political freedom. Technocratic society resembles a corporation run by the board of directors rather than a republic of citizens. We have pointed out the factors, which make it appealing in the modern world. We then have analyzed the ideas of Howard Scott, the founder of the movement Technocracy Inc., who advocated this political model in the industrial age, and Parag Khanna, who has made similar claims about the benefits of technocracy in the digital age. It has been proven that both these thinkers share the same illiberal mindset including the common faith in the applicability of scientific methods of social management without regard for popular votes and opinions, admiration of autocratic powers of the day, and disregard for democratic procedures, which they see as hurdles on the path toward economic well-being and political domination. Finally, we asked the question: if the challenge to political freedom in Ukraine proceeds from technocracy, will it be defended in the same way as during the three Ukrainian Maidans (1990, 2004, 2014)? We deliberately leave this question unanswered, hoping that the answer will be investigated in future publications.