Re: Re: Re: Krugman attacks the EPI! (fwd)

["Jordan D. Bell" <chanodin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I am somewhat confused by the term technocrat. Is it used to mean one who
uses power, or representative of a adherent of Technocracy's technological
social design.

On Mon, 24 Apr 2000 xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Date: Mon, 24 Apr 2000 15:53:36 -0400 (EDT)
> From: xxxxxx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Reply-To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> To: pen-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [PEN-L:18324] Re: Re: Krugman attacks the EPI! (fwd)
>
>
> >At 02:30 PM 4/24/00 -0400, you wrote:
> >>i did *not* mean by "originality"  "creativity"  or "cleverness". I
> >meant
> >>that Krugman "repeats" his free market dogma... the "unoriginality" he
> >>rediscovered before he became a pundit!
>
> >I think that it's unfair to dub PK a practitioner of "free market dogma,"
> >since he's a technocratic type.
>
> Unfairness? I am not quite sure. Almost all the technocrats I am aware of
> are "closet" free marketeers, either preaching "state regulated
> capitalism" to make sure market works or openly admitting the inherent
> justness of the market ("market is good but elites politicize it"
> rhetoric). Both types are capitalists. They are just differently
> capitalist.  i don't think a technocrat would have a problem with free
> market in so far as elites intervene to secure capitalism.
>
> Mine, Aysen
>
> >Jim Devine
>
>
>

"There are no facts, only interpretations."
-Fredreiche Neitzsche