by Patrick WoodGuest Waking Times

The dots between Technocracy and Transhumanism are easily connected once its understood that both sit atop the pseudo-science religion of Scientism, which posits that science is god and scientists and engineers are its priesthood. This article provides the current framework to understand this nexus.

Technocracy is to the transformation of society as Transhumanism is to the transformation of the human condition of people who would live in that society.

Both are underpinned by a religious belief known as Scientism that says that science is a god and that scientists, engineers and technologists are the priesthood that translates findings into practice.

It is a fatal error to equate Scientism with science. True science explores the natural world using the time-tested scientific method of repeated experimentation and validation. By comparison, Scientism is a speculative, metaphysical worldview about the nature and reality of the universe and man’s relation to it.

Scientism refutes traditional religious views, morals and philosophy and instead looks to science as the source for personal and societal moral value.

The relationship between Technocracy and Transhumanism can be seen as early as 1933 when Harold Loeb wrote Life in a Technocracy: What It Might Be Like:

“Technocracy envisages another form of domestication, a form in which man may become more than man… Technocracy is designed to develop the so-called higher faculties in every man and not to make each man resigned to the lot into which he may be born… Through breeding with specific individuals for specific purposes… A technocracy, then, should in time produce a race of men superior in quality to any now known on earth…”

Thus, Loeb saw Technocracy (the society) as producing a superior quality of man by applying advanced technology to the human condition.

The Nature Of Technocracy

Formalized in 1932 by scientists and engineers at Columbia University, the movement defined itself in a 1938 edition of its magazine, The Technocrat:

“Technocracy is the science of social engineering, the scientific operation of the entire social mechanism to produce and distribute goods and services to the entire population… For the first time in human history it will be done as a scientific, technical, engineering problem.”

Indeed, Technocracy was an economic system based on science and social engineering. Technocrats were so certain that their scientific approach was so righteous that there would be no need for any political structures whatsoever:

“There will be no place for Politics, Politicians, Finance or Financiers, Rackets or Racketeers… Technocracy will distribute by means of a certificate of distribution available to every citizen from birth to death.

Today, Technocracy is embodied in the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset and the various United Nations’ manifestations of Sustainable Development: Agenda 21, 2030 Agenda, New Urban Agenda, etc.

The Nature Of Transhumanism

A philosophical mainstay of modern Transhumanism, Max More, defined it in 1990 as:


The means to the end is ultimately genetic engineering that takes over and speeds up evolution theory to create humanity 2.0.

Since the advent of CRISPR gene-editing technology, Transhumans have saturated universities and private corporations to modify all categories of living things, including humans.

What is preached as the preservation of biodiversity by the United Nations is really the takeover of genetic material, which was noted as early as 1994, just two years after the debut of Sustainable Development and Agenda 21 at the UN Conference on Economic Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janiero, Brazil.

The 1994 book, The Earth Brokers, was written by two principal participants in the Rio process who did not blindly swallow what had just happened. They noted two things about the biodiversity convention that 156 nations of the world adopted:

“The convention implicitly equates the diversity of life – animals and plants – to the diversity of genetic codes, for which read genetic resources. By doing so, diversity becomes something modern science can manipulate… the convention promotes biotechnology as being ‘essential for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity.”

Secondly, they noted that “the main stake raised by the biodiversity convention is the issue of ownership and control over biological diversity… the major concern was protection of the pharmaceutical and emerging biological industries.”…


F. Kaskais Web Guru

Leave a Reply


You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s