The former Soviet Union is generally considered an example. 89% of Politburo members were engineers and leaders like Leonid Brezhnev had very technical backgrounds
EDIT: to add some more context
Technocracy in the Second World (see: tektology) is quite common. In the First World the history of technocracy can't really be understood without studying the history of eugenics. This is also generally true of much of our science and even mathematical theory. Terms like "regression to the mean" have direct origins in eugenics theory
> In the First World the history of technocracy can't really be understood without studying the history of eugenics. This is also generally true of much of our science and even mathematical theory. Terms like "regression to the mean" have direct origins in eugenics theory
And yet studying the history of eugenics will not help you understand regression to the mean. It's certainly not a bar to understanding.
I wasn't implying that you need to know the history of eugenics to understand statistics. I'm sure most statisticians today don't have a good grasp of that history.
I was saying that you need to have a good grasp on the history of eugenics to have a good context to understand the history of technocracy, a political ideology, in the West
EDIT: to add some more context
Technocracy in the Second World (see: tektology) is quite common. In the First World the history of technocracy can't really be understood without studying the history of eugenics. This is also generally true of much of our science and even mathematical theory. Terms like "regression to the mean" have direct origins in eugenics theory
https://nautil.us/issue/92/frontiers/how-eugenics-shaped-sta...