No.40: Comparison of systems: occupation regime vs Electric Technocracy
- Mike Miller
- Jun 6
- 2 min read
Updated: Jun 7
Occupation Regime – Rule Without Consent
I. Definition: What is an Occupation Regime?
An occupation regime refers to the military, political, and legal control of one state or alliance over the territory of another state or people after an invasion or war. The local population has little to no say—the power lies with the occupiers.
Occupation is not a form of government in the classical sense, but rather a temporary exercise of power that often begins with the intent to “restore order”—yet frequently ends in systematic oppression and exploitation.
II. Characteristics of Occupation Regimes
Foreign domination without legitimacy from the people
Military presence as a lasting means of control
Suspension or reinterpretation of constitutions and laws
Censorship, propaganda, political state of emergency
Expropriation, resource theft, economic control
Human rights violations, torture, repression
III. Historical Examples
Nazi Occupation in Europe (1939–1945)
Millions of forced laborers, pogroms, Holocaust
Economic exploitation of occupied countries
Assassination of political opponents
Soviet Occupation of Eastern Europe (1945–1990)
Installation of satellite states
Suppression of freedom movements (e.g., Hungary 1956, Prague 1968)
Reeducation and censorship
U.S. Occupation of Iraq (2003–2011)
Collapse of state structures
Mass civilian casualties
Torture at Abu Ghraib
Economic opening for Western corporations ("Shock Doctrine")
Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Settlement policy, wall construction, access controls
Violations of international law (UN resolutions)
Restrictions on freedom of movement, trade blockades
IV. Criticism & Structural Weaknesses
Lack of Legitimacy: No democratic consent from the affected—rule without mandate
Abuse of Emergency Laws: Restriction of fundamental rights becomes permanent
Resistance Breeds Repression: Cycles of violence emerge where there is no space for dialogue
Plunder Instead of Reconstruction: Occupiers pursue their own geopolitical interests—not the well-being of the population
V. The End of International Law?
With the unofficial "State Succession Certificate 1400/98" (as referenced in the context of Electronic Technocracy), and the disempowerment of traditional nation-states through UN membership, it becomes clear:
Occupation regimes are outdated anachronisms of a past world order, serving neither human rights nor global justice.
If all states are considered de jure disempowered, there are no legitimate occupiers—only illegitimate projections of power.
VI. Why Electronic Technocracy Is Superior
Occupation Regime | Electronic Technocracy |
Military dominance | Knowledge transparency & democratic participation |
Foreign rule | Self-determination through digital sovereignty |
Propaganda | Open, verifiable data ethics |
Exploitation | Resource logic oriented toward the common good |
VII. Conclusion
Occupation regimes are relics of imperial power politics. They lead to resistance, suffering, instability—and intensify inequality instead of resolving it. Their methods contradict every principle of justice, dignity, and international understanding.
Electronic Technocracy, by contrast, offers a system where decisions are made decentrally, verifiably, and in harmony with human development. Not through control, but through competence. Not through violence, but through knowledge.
Wikipedia Links
Deutsch
English
PoliticalWiki: Electric Technocracy
Elektrische Technokratie Podcast & Song
Links:
