Are there any historical examples of technocratic societies?

Are there any historical examples of technocratic societies?
Where engineers were largely in charge of production/economic initiatives/governance?

'Sup?

Countless attempts, but I only recall the Mexican group, and they were fairly mediocre, surprisingly made the best they could in the 80´s

The only engineer presidents in American history were Hoover and Carter, the former was a clueless idiot and the latter was a career cuck.

If there are they didn't last long. Similar to military Juntas, putting people who have skills unrelated to governing and administration in charge of those things tends to work out pretty poorly. The skills necessary to design a bridge are not the same skills necessary to lead and govern a nation.

Modern Day China is effectively a technocracy.

This stemmed from the obsession of PRC to modernize quickly, and Chinese & Soviet scientists, engineers, and doctors were considered the spearheads of this endeavor. As such, the traditional meme Western path to political office such as a Law Degree/career doesn't get you far in China. However if you have a scientific/engineering degree, the peasants considered you a god.

>A Revolution Without Bloodshed
>shows a giant robot killing people

I don't understand what this is supposed to be saying. Is the robot the technocratic revolution? If it is then it's hardly "without bloodshed". Am I supposed to fear it, is it the embodiment of the economic problems of the time? Or am I supposed to root for it? The scene is taking place in D.C near the capitol, so are the people it's attacking corrupt government officials? Or is it just wantonly sacking the nation's capital?

Who designed this shit

Commies

USSR following Khrushchev

USSR.

Oh, I guess you could call the European Commission a semi-technocracy, since it's made up of teams of experts in the fields they are meant to tackle (except for the commissioners that are political appointees). But they don't have executive powers, they can be vetoed either by council or parliament.

>US
>Virtually no economists or engineers

The absolute state of America. No wonder its political climate is a catastrophe

China is more of a corporatocracy than a technocracy, you're given a decent amount of freedom as a small business owner, but if you manage to grow that business to become fairly large then it comes under more control and you get to be a party member.

>All those Business & Law Degrees in the USA
No wonder it is such a shitshow.

Engineers do not make the best managers, which is effectively the job legislators are given. There's a huge difference between simply building a product and determining how that product will be regulated for the betterment of the common good. Engineers are usually shit at interpreting economic data or understanding the limits of their office, which lawyers and economists know instinctively.

Also more broadly speaking one can easily construe law study as engineering applied to legal policy, so this entire argument and train of thought is moot anyway.

Technocracy is shit.

>Engineers are usually shit at interpreting economic data or understanding the limits of their office,
>which lawyers and economists know instinctively.
>lawyers
>know instinctively.
Lawyers are famous for loophole hunting.

So they make for great legislators

>t. brainlet, the post

Those are the people you want to write your laws, desu. It's a competition between those that want to make a system exploit-proof and the people that want to exploit the system - both of these people need to be good at finding potential for exploitation.

FPBP Engineer rulership

>Hoover
>clueless
He undoubtedly failed at managing the crisis of depressio but to call him clueless is simply wrong

By your logic all 20th century socialist countries were technocracies. Tbh that wouldnt really be wrong as all heavily utilized central planning, delegating to experts etc etc. abd all the accompanying benefits and problems of these methods