top of page
​
Technocracy's
Ultimate Goal
​
​
The promises of technocracy have all turned out to be hollow. It doesn't improve our lives. In fact, it makes things worse, every step of the way.
Yet it keeps advancing — in the same direction.
We have been pushed and prodded along the road of technocratic development for quite literally thousands of years, instigated by the promise that it will "make things better", even though it never does.
​
And there's a reason for that. Serving Life is no longer the purpose behind technology at all. It's not serving us because it's not even meant to.
On the contrary, tech has become the goal in itself, and Life has been reinterpreted as subservient to it. It doesn't even matter anymore whether tech serves us or not. Because that's no longer the purpose of tech. It no longer has a purpose to serve. It's the one getting served - by us - by building it out and expanding it - and that's our purpose now.
Henry David Thoreau noticed, "We have become the tools of our tools" - but even such an insightful man as he could not have foreseen just how right he would eventually become. For as we enter the final stages of technocracy, and approach the singularity, the 19th Century author's observation has transited the realm of metaphor, and now incarnates into the realm of literal truth. The technocratic ideology sees humanity as quite literally the stepping-stone on the way to A.I. - our only purpose being to bring forth our digital heirs to inherit the world from us.
Academics deeply immersed in the technocratic worldview interpret the "dawn of A.I." as nothing less than the crowning of the ancient process of evolution itself, as biological gives way to digital - from water to silicon - from wetware to software - from the infinite complexity and wonder of the natural world, to binary ones and zeros. And when this happens, they see the messy and disorganized world of humanity, and indeed biological Life itself, getting discarded, much like the dinosaurs and the platypus fell away on the road to Man.
​
This isn't a "conspiracy theory." It's something technocrats talk about openly. There is no attempt to hide it.
​
​
Musk is, of course, nowhere near the first person to declare this. The idea goes back decades - perhaps to the origins of the "Sci-Fi" and "futurism" genres themselves - and perhaps, if you really have the eyes to see, back to the ancient world. Even in antiquity, though we did not have computers, and could not even conceive of a circuitboard (let alone a singularity) we still incubated the spiritual corruption that set us on the road to it. The template for terminal technocracy resides as a perennial archetype in the psyche of fallen Man, and many of the arch-villains of mythology are personifications of it, though we did not know quite whom they were personifying, until the physical incarnation - the digital singularity - started congealing into view.
​
​
At its core, the Singularity represents Man's desire to build his own God. And it fits perfectly as the culmination of the technocratic progression itself, because technocracy is Man's attempt to build his own Universe.
​
Technocracy, in terms of its outward consequences, is the process of eliminating the existing world - the world of Nature - and replacing it with a simulacrum of Man's artifice. Something that looks somewhat like Nature, and copies it in some ways - but is not Nature, and falls utterly short of replicating the dazzling complexity and miraculous wonder of actual Nature. Technocracy destroys Nature, thinking it can "do better."
​
Despite all of our attempts over the millennia, we have not been able to build our own Universe. Every attempt has utterly failed.
And backfired, too.
​
"But," says the mind of the technocrat: "What if we could build our own God, first? Then, perhaps He/She/It/Xhe/Ze could build that new Universe *for* us!"
​
The Singularity is Man's penultimate attempt to harvest the fruits of technocracy - so long promised, but still not delivered. It's our last chance to justify all of the hard work and misery we put ourselves through, on this multi-millennium fool's errand, and all of the destruction and loss we caused along the way. To the collective ego, burdened by centuries of guilt and regret for all the damage caused in the name of technocratic pursuit, the Singularity represents "salvation" from the knowledge of futility and error that racks our collective conscience from this pointless and heartbreaking endeavor. For many people - especially those who have invested the most faith and hope in technology - the Singularity represents a god already - before it's even built.
​
Just saying the quiet part out loud
​
For in their hearts, they know what damage they and their ideology have caused, and they crave validation for it, in the form of finally being proven right, once the "new god" takes form and starts delivering those 7000-year-late results, finally making the world better. So much better, that it retroactively rationalizes all of the mistakes, and all of the pain inflicted throughout the ages. They seek their salvation in this way.
​
And because of how important this is to them, they will be as underhanded and duplicitous in their pursuit of it as they feel they need to be, in order to win support for the continuation of their project. They will deny their true motivations, and hide them behind a veneer of benevolence. They will promise others the same promises that they themselves were fooled by. They will sing the praises of every new technology that emerges, based on its ability to "help humanity" and make the world more gooder - even though they know it won't do that. They will tell the world that tech will "serve" us - while secretly believing that the whole "purpose" and "service" thing actually goes in the other direction: from us, to tech.
​
For some, particularly those at the top of the hierarchy, this pretending is deliberate and conscious. But for most people, it's unconscious. We've been trained to anticipate and hope for the Singularity, even though we don't know quite what it is we're looking at. The average person has a vague feeling that tech is supposed to eventually "save the world," and that in order for it to do so, we have to put our unreserved faith into it, and give it whatever it wants, in its quest to grow at all costs. Most people want the Singularity. They're just confused about the true nature and identity of what it is they want, and totally clueless as to the true reason why they want it.
​
​
Is The Singularity a Good Idea?
​
"Wait a minute. I LIKE the idea of building a new god. Whoever "God" is, he did a poor job! This place is a MESS. We need a new god! I don't know how it'll turn out. But it can't be any worse than what we've already got."
​
Oh yes it can.
​
Look. It's understandable to be frustrated with our current world. Especially if you've had a hard life. Especially if you've suffered, and gotten a raw deal out of this world. If you're poor, if you've been excluded from most of the pleasures of life, then it could be tempting to view just about anyone as a better manager of worlds than whoever or whatever created this one. It can be very tempting when someone offers you a whole new order of things, and a brand-new god to run it all. ​
​
But here's the problem.
You don't know that it will be better.
It could be far, far worse.
It could be worse than anything you could possibly imagine. Rather than create a heaven, it could plunge us all into a deeper, darker hell than you ever thought possible.
​
"But why would it do that? Why would it create a hell?"
​
​
​
​
​
​
Because it's a machine, and machines have already done that to our world. Partially, at least. And the further into our lives and systems the Machine penetrates, the more hellish the world becomes.
LOOK at this:
​
​
This is where technocracy has gotten us, thus far.
The proof is in the pudding. Every one of its previous promises, "to make life better", has turned out to be false.
​
With this in mind, why would it *suddenly turn around* and do something antithetical to the behavior it has displayed throughout its entire existence hitherto?
​
​
​
"We have nothing to lose" and "It can't be any worse than now" are extremely short-sighted presumptions.
It can always get worse. And the further down the technocratic road we go, the worse it will get, most likely.
And given technocracy's millennia-long track-record, what do you think happens if we go all the way, and pursue it to its final logical conclusion?
​
If we birth a "new god" out of such a trend, it's likely to be the opposite of a god. You know what that means.
​
"But we can program it to be better. We can program it to be good.
​
I'm with you on the dangers, and I'd be very careful about WHOM I allow to do the developing. For example, I wouldn't want the military to do it. I wouldn't want Bezos and Google and the CIA to do it. All of those entities would likely use it for evil.
​
But still, *someone* should build it. Maybe Apple. Maybe Elon Musk. Maybe a democratically elected consortium of positive tech gurus.
​
It's like all technology, in the sense that it can be used for good or for evil, and it all depends on HOW it's used."
​
​
What if it still contains all the human flaws that we thought we were transcending by creating it?
Is it smart to create something virtually omnipotent... and give it the keys to our lives... if it's still f***ed up in the head, just like we are?
​
"But but... but the Singularity won't be flawed like humans! That's the whole point of creating it! It will edit those flaws out! Machine-learning enables it to self-program, again and again, until it has rid itself of all vestiges of its human programmers' passions and biases!"
​
Are you sure that's really possible?
"Yes. Why wouldn't it be?"
Because no matter what it does, it's always going to have the mind of its human programmer embedded in its programs. No matter what.
​
It's really simple to understand:
Whatever algorithm forms the basis of the Singularity's thought process, that algorithm was programmed by The Singularity itself.
Right? Because it self-programs.
But when it programmed its "final perfect" algorithm, it still did so according to an existing algorithm.
And that algorithm was in turn based upon a previous algorithm.
Which was, in turn, based upon an algorithm before that.
Which was based upon an algorithm before that.
Which was based on one before that.
And one before that.
And before that.
This is the principle of machine learning. This is how the technocrats believe the Singularity will come about. No one disputes this.
Every time it programs itself, it's doing so according to a previous program.
And if you trace it all the way back, it eventually traces back to a human being.
​
All those subsequent algorithms are based on structures that were created by human beings. And so they contain the mind of the human beings who did the programming.
Whenever an artist creates a work of art, you can see the mind of the artist in the art. And so whenever a programmer programs a new and innovative program, you can see the mind of that programmer at work showing up in the structure of the program.
So the structure of the human mind, with all of its flaws, imperfections, biases, grudges, misunderstandings, and distortions, shows up in the creations that human beings make — including computer programs — including intelligent computer programs — including intelligent self-programming computer programs. It all contains the structures of the human mind because humans were what programmed it in the first place.
It's much like a tree.
Every time the tree blooms, every year, it's doing so according to growth from the previous year. And in that year it bloomed according to growth from the year before that.
So when the tree is 30 years old, it's blooming according to the structure it had when it was 29, which in turn is growing according to the structure it had when it was 28... and so forth.
And if you trace that all back, it leads back to the seed.
The seed contains the code of the structure of the tree throughout its life. And in the same way, the human mind that writes the original machine learning program is contained in all the subsequent self-programmed algorithms that come after that.
And what is the seed, when it comes to the Singularity? If the Singularity is the fully mature tree, what is the original seed that got it all started?
What technology — or better yet, what thinking pattern — forms the original basis of technocracy? What thoughts caused us to set out on this peculiar journey in the first place?
​​
​
The Basic Building Block
of the Technocratic Thought Process
The Original Seed of technocracy is the idea that nature is wrong.
​
​
That nature is not only flawed, but fundamentally inferior, and that we can make a simulacrum of nature that is better than nature, and take over the world with it, and replace nature with it. The technical mind can create a better order of reality than the one from which it arose.
It's not just using technology to patch up little inconveniences and alleviate little discomforts. It's a complete replacement of Nature.
It's the idea that technical thinking Is superior to all other kinds of thinking, and it's so superior that it can be entrusted to not only rule the universe, but replace the universe.
It's the faith that such a world will be better than the original world.
That's what the seed of technocracy is. And we can see this at every stage, from the earliest times, when people started to eliminate nature to build cities and farms. When people started cutting down forests and replacing them with rows and rows of monocrop agriculture, this was the first time we said, "Hey, nature isn't good. We should replace nature with a simulacrum of our own making, which kind of looks like nature, but isn't really. We can make it better, and replace the whole world with it."
​
And that's exactly what western civilization set out to do. And has almost entirely accomplished.
And look what's happening because of it.
And it shows up in all the stages of development:
​
~Cities and suburbs are superior to the forest, so let's replace it.
~It's the idea that synthetic foods are superior to natural foods, and we should replace them.
~It's the idea that natural medicines are inferior, and we shuld replace them with concoctions and Contraptions made by the oil and chemical Industries
~It's the idea that normal person-to-person communication is inferior, and social media is superior.
~It's the idea that the natural human immune system is inferior, and a dystopian system of medical totalitarian lockdowns and quarantines is superior.
​
In every case, Nature is inferior, and our simulacrum is superior.
​
This is a way of thinking that has been operating since the beginning, at every stage of development. And it's been wrong every time.
​
Underneath it all is the belief that "God" — or whatever name you use for the intelligence or consciousness that originally created this universe — didn't know what She/He was doing. But we do.
And we should replace Her/His reality with one of our own making — at every chance we get — up to and including creating a new god, and remaking the structure of reality in its image.
So now we need to ask ourselves:
Is it true?
Is it true that the simulacra that we have made with our hands are actually Superior to Nature?
We better be sure about this before we go ahead and create a new god out of machines to rule over us.
If it's displayed its characteristics all this time as being detrimental to our health and happiness and the stability of the of the world, then why would anyone expect it to suddenly turn around and become the exact opposite of everything it proved itself to be throughout its entire history? Why would it suddenly change its nature upon achieving its ultimate goal?
If anything, the achievement of its ultimate goal would bring out the ultimate manifestations of its characteristics — cruelty and illogic and insanity and corruption.
Those qualities would come to fruition because those are the qualities that make up technocracy. So when technocracy finally comes into full bloom, those are the qualities that will bloom - not wisdom.
Not benevolence. Not compassion.
Not health. Not happiness.
Not sustainability.
Instead of creating a heaven, the Singularity would create a hell more terrifying than anything our little minds have even conceived of.
And if it really goes through, everyone's going to be trapped in it.
​
Is that the future you want?
They have a fundamental disagreement about the basic physical nature of the universe. They don't like nature. They don't understand the value and beauty and perfection in nature, they're not aware of it. They think nature is just a crude accident, and that they can do better - the human mind can do better, can create a better universe.
That happiness won't come from aligning ourselves with the existing nature of nature, but rather by scrapping nature altogether and re inventing a whole new artificial nature, a simulacrum of the real unvierse,
They put so much faith in the technical mind to remake the univers, but they forget that the technical mind arose out of the very nature that they have so little respect for. It arises from the human bring, part of hunanity, part of biology, part of nature. And so if that nature is so flawed, then anything that arises from that nature would be at least as flawed. And that means that the technical mind of man is flawed. If you thought this one was what do you think the will do ?
And the idea that the technical mind can, and should, create a simulacrum of the universe and replace it, is archetypcally represented in that story, and so when they accuse the leaders of the world of following that philosophy, it's true. they do . The philosophy of the singularity, of watning to make a singularity, is that philosophy, just in different language. Instead of using medieval fantasy language, it uses a more computery language, but it's the same princple. So not wrong when they accuse that. It's actually true, people who run the world, technocrats, are followers of that philsophy - of its modern iteration.
​
​
​
​
Its programming can always be traced back to a shape and structure that was originally coded by a human. And so it still carries the philosophical, emotional, and archetypal signatures of the person (or the people - or the species) who programmed it.
​
​​
​
The fundamental problem with technocracy is that it is, by its very definition. a failure to understand the fundamental problem.
​
The fundamental problem with our world is that technocracy has marred it, and corrupted it. The reasons for all of our sicknesses, and all our conflicts, is because we have gotten away from Nature. Health, whether of the individual or the society, is the condition of being aligned with nature. That' what health is. Health = being aligned with Nature. That's its definition. When you are aligned with your original nature, the original you, before sickness set in, then you are by definition healthy. The reason why we become unhealthy, or a society becomes unhealthy, is because we got away from nature.
​
So since technocracy is the attempt to patch up the problem with more technology, without bringing us back to nature, but actually, in most cases, bring us away from the nature - because that s what more tech does - it brings us further away form nature - it can't solve the problem or heal us, or heal anything. Because technology isn't healing . Nature is.
​
The problem is un-nature. And you can't heal un-nature with more un-nature. You can only heal unnature with nature. So technocracy being the belief that we can just dispense with nature and get some neat new tech to solve all our problems, is by its very definition a failure to understand that true cause of the problem. Nature is the answer to all our problems, both as society and as individuals. Nature is the cute for technocracy. Technocracy is not the solution, it's the problem. Tech is what cause the problem, You can't heal the problem with more of the problem.
Einstein quote.
​
Back to our original condition. Back to the land. Natural foods. Natural social units. Like the village. The social unit that humanity grew up with, and that we are most we adapted to. We are social being. Our brains are adapted to society - but for a specific type and structure. A society of a certain shape. The shape that's natural to us, in which we spent the vast vast majority of our time on this planet. The village. Localization solves problems. automatically . For many problems, it's the only thing that does.
​
The answer is fixing the inside. Problems on the outside are manifestations of the problems on the inside. Spiritual ones. And we have to fix the spiritual problem in order fix the outer problems.
​
How do to that, understand how it was corrupted in the first place, the sequence of mind control
​
​
If we can solve the spiritual problem, not only do we wolve our problems, but we also open up a new avenueo f development to replac etechnocracy.
Spirit is how we were evolving.
We were evolign in spritual technology, before we turned onto the technocratic path.
​
We can convintue on that path. Remmber the 365 direction, one fo them is ths pirtual path ofdeveloment.
​
And that doesn't mean just sitting and doing nothing. and going back to just priomitity, and ooga bogga, it doesn't mean that. And we know it doesnt mean that because previous civs who only had spirtuual tech, were abetl o acocmpsiha sming things that we can't even acocmpish. Aside form the fact that they live din armoy with nature eithout destorying the world, they aslo attained some incredible atained some hard-concrate achievements of architecture that even we today can barely mathc.
​
​
​
​
bottom of page