Well, I learned something new today while teaching my political science course.
I was walking students through my recommended process for getting started doing research on political issues, and at this point we were comparing basic Google search results with Wikipedia (don’t worry, we got far more specific and advanced, which might be a good blog post for another day?), and as I was skimming through Wikipedia articles turned up by my search for “political issues related to engineering Wikipedia,” which was the same phrase used for my Google search, minus the “Wikipedia” add-on, I saw an article titled “Technocracy.”
Well, “technocracy” is one of our course’s basic vocabulary words, so I thought I’d take a look at that article. By the way, I was projecting my own computer screen onto the big screen at the front of the room so everyone could watch what I was doing as I talked about it. Anyway, this is where it got interesting. I was skimming through the article, seeing lots of the usual stuff, blah blah blah. Pausing to make note of the article’s reference to Plato’s “Republic,”which our class had read an excerpt from (a selection from Book VII, the “Allegory of the Cave” and associated discussion of who should “rule” and how).
And then I stopped short. I was just astonished by what I was reading, and I told the students I had never known this until that very moment when I was seeing it with them. Read through the following excerpt from this Wikipedia article, and tell me if you are surprised, as well.
Wikipedia https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technocracy
The former government of the Soviet Union has been referred to as a technocracy.[20] Soviet leaders like Leonid Brezhnev often had a technical background. In 1986, 89% of Politburo members were engineers.[20]
Leaders of the Chinese Communist Party used to be mostly professional engineers. According to surveys of municipal governments of cities with a population of 1 million or more in China, it has been found that over 80% of government personnel had a technical education.
(Wikipedia’s article on “Technocracy”)
As I told my students, very few members of the United States Congress have ever been engineers. Currently, in the 118th Congress, there are nine engineers in the House and one in the Senate. That is 10 engineers out of 535 members of Congress, House and Senate combined, which works out to less than 2% of our Congress! We could add in some scientists, but that wouldn’t bring the numbers up all that much. But then compare that with almost 90% of the Soviet Union’s version of Congress being made up of engineers! And the idea that leadership of the communist party in China used to be mostly engineers!

Completely bemused and nonplussed, I couldn’t help laughing and told my students (mostly engineering majors, as I teach at Milwaukee School of Engineering!) that I’m not sure what this info might imply about authoritarianism and engineering. Are engineers somehow well suited to authoritarianism? Do authoritarian governments find themselves attracted to the ability of engineers to design and operate systems? I have no clue, but as I told my students, it might be an intriguing topic to look into more. And I suppose a related political issue to think about is what it means for America that the people making policy at the federal level apparently have little professional knowledge of engineering and technology.
Anyway, that’s my blog post for today. I was just very surprised, and because I’ve been teaching political science for decades and have been interested in politics much longer than that and never knew this, I figured you probably also didn’t know and it would be interesting for you to learn about, too!
Would you like new posts delivered to your inbox? To subscribe, click here.









