In recent decades, the world has faced an escalating series of ecological crises. From climate change to resource depletion, environmental collapse seems to be just beyond the horizon. For many, the solution is clear: the implementation of large-scale green policies that can guide us toward a sustainable future. However, as we rush to adopt these solutions, a deeper question remains unanswered: Are we, in our pursuit of sustainability, building a more authoritarian global system that suppresses the very freedoms we aim to protect?

This editorial explores the rise of a Technocratic Global Ideology, one that seeks to solve the world’s most pressing issues—primarily climate change—through technological and scientific advancements. While this might seem promising, it is crucial to question whether such solutions, if unchecked, could lead to an authoritarian regime where power is consolidated at the top, with little regard for the input of grassroots civil society.

The Technocratic Vision

Technocracy, as a political and economic system, places decision-making power in the hands of experts—scientists, engineers, and technocrats who are believed to be best equipped to manage societal issues. The promise of technocracy is that by relying on data, science, and technological advancements, we can avoid the chaos and inefficiencies of traditional political systems. However, as we see with the current Green Technocratic Ideology, there is a danger that such a system could evolve into one where the elite control not just the direction of policy but the very framework of society itself.

The driving force behind the current Green Technocratic Ideology is the belief that technology can provide the solutions to our environmental crises. Green energy initiatives, from solar power to wind farms, are touted as panaceas for our fossil fuel dependence. These technologies are promoted as not only saving the planet but also leading us toward a new era of sustainability. However, there is an implicit assumption that these technologies, and the policies that surround them, will be managed by a centralized authority—largely devoid of public input or oversight.

A Dangerous Authoritarian Drift

The problem lies not with the technologies themselves, but with the system under which they are deployed. In the pursuit of a “green future,” many governments and corporations are forming partnerships that increasingly centralize power. This trend is evident in the rise of the “Energy Industrial Complex,” a vast network of state-led and corporate collaborations aimed at simplifying and standardizing energy production. The Green Technocratic Ideology assumes that the answer to our problems lies in top-down control, which, while effective in addressing the perceived urgency of the environmental crisis, has far-reaching consequences for individual freedoms and democratic engagement.

By concentrating power in the hands of a few decision-makers, this ideology risks ignoring the input of civil society—the local knowledge, tacit skills, and human creativity that are essential for human well-being. Historically, when these voices are suppressed, the result is often disaster. As Lewis Mumford warned, the consequences of ignoring democratic technics—the technologies that empower local communities and individuals—are profound. Without these participatory elements, the very systems meant to save us could become the mechanisms of our downfall.

Mass Cognitive Disempowerment

One of the key reasons why these policies and ideologies have gained traction is due to what I term “mass cognitive disempowerment bias.” In simple terms, this bias refers to the widespread belief that individual agency cannot possibly affect large-scale systems. It’s a psychological phenomenon in which people feel powerless in the face of complex global issues like climate change. As a result, they defer to the authorities—be it governments, scientists, or corporate elites—believing that they, alone, have the solutions. This creates a cycle of disempowerment, where the very people who are most affected by environmental policies feel alienated from the decision-making process.

This mass disempowerment is a key driver behind the implementation of top-down policies. When citizens feel they cannot change the system, they are more likely to accept whatever solutions are handed down, even if these solutions restrict their freedoms or suppress their voices. In this sense, the Green Technocratic Ideology feeds into a larger cultural narrative of helplessness. Instead of empowering communities to take charge of their environmental futures, we see a move toward centralization and control, where the interests of the powerful are prioritized over those of the grassroots.

The Ecological Crisis and Its Political Implications

At the core of this issue is the apparent environmental crisis itself. As the planet continues to face ecological destruction, the need for bold action is undeniable. However, we must recognize that the solutions proposed by the Green Technocratic Ideology are not neutral—they come with their own set of political and social implications. When the energy industry is dominated by a small group of corporate stakeholders and state-backed initiatives, we risk not only compromising our environment but also our democratic values.

The rise of the “Green Industrial Complex” is a direct consequence of this centralization. The focus is on large-scale, state-managed projects that promise to fix the environmental crisis through technological means. While these projects may have merit, they are often funded by corporate interests that have their own agenda. The result is a system that is increasingly detached from the needs and desires of ordinary people.

Grassroots Movements: A Call for Democratic Technics

In contrast to the technocratic approach, grassroots movements embody what Mumford called “Democratic Technics.” These are the local, community-based initiatives that empower individuals to take control of their futures, using their own knowledge and creativity to address environmental issues. Grassroots movements are essential for creating a sustainable future because they promote diversity, local knowledge, and innovation. Instead of relying on top-down solutions that ignore the complexities of local ecosystems and cultures, these movements encourage a more inclusive approach to problem-solving.

While grassroots organizations may seem small and fragmented, they represent the heart of democratic engagement. It is through these movements that we can build the kind of resilience needed to tackle the ecological problems. By fostering local solutions and encouraging community-driven decision-making, we can ensure that environmental policies reflect the diverse needs of the people they are meant to serve.

Toward a New Paradigm

The ecological problems are real, and the need for action is clear. However, as we move toward a sustainable future, we must be wary of the dangers posed by the Green Technocratic Ideology. Instead of placing all our faith in centralized, top-down solutions, we must find ways to integrate the creativity and knowledge of grassroots movements into the decision-making process. Only by empowering individuals and communities to take charge of their own futures can we hope to build a truly sustainable and democratic society.

As we rewrite the narrative of the future, we must recognize that the solutions to our environmental crises lie not just in technology, but in the empowerment of individuals and communities. Only then can we avoid the impending disaster that looms over us—a disaster driven by the unchecked rise of an authoritarian technocratic state, and the mass cognitive disempowerment that allows it to thrive.

This was originally published in VPN – London by Konrad Chapman, [email protected]