According to dictionaries, technocracy describes a government which is under control of technically skilled people. Many people have associated this interpretation of the concept of "technocracy" with what actual, existing organisations advocating technocracy want to establish. Technocracy is unique in the aspect that the word itself draws negative connotations from all directions. The political left accuses the political right of being "technocrats" and vice-versa.

When technocrats are confronted about their ideological inclination, they often do not know how to deal with the hostility expressed by persons who have an inner mental picture of technocracy as some form of evil conspiracy, or mindless gray economistic totalitarian belief in the supremacy of industrialism.

We have most often discussed what technocracy is from a technical perspective, which has given the impression that we are hiding or downplaying the "ideological issues". This has given room for accusations.

One could say that when technocrats are confronted on what technocracy is, they generally answer what we want to do. That is of course because no one has up to yet offered any viable definition of technocracy as an ideology. The reason for that is - shamefully enough - that no technocrat has ever investigated any eventual ideological foundation of technocracy.

In this article, we aim to explore why there is so little "ideological self-analysis" in technocracy, about the potential of the human being and the role of the technate, as well as human rights under a technate.