Boaty McBoatface is even the exact reason the Founders gave for the original system, though they certainly framed it more 18th century terms. Founders deeply distrusted democracy, which is why they founded a republic, even if many insist day in and day out that we are a democracy. There is a difference, and the difference is important.

Something I find humorous though, is that some people actually call our founding system as a mixed bag and not an absolute success. While it is true that change to some aspects may in fact be very beneficial, when you consider the normal state of humanity and governance that existed almost universally prior to the USA, and continues to exist everywhere except Northwestern Europe and the Anglo countries, the USA experiment can be considered nothing but the most resounding governmental success in human history. At least if basic human rights, and standard of living are the metrics you use. While imperfections certainly exist, the degree to which so many take the successful aspects of the USA for granted is rather frightening, and also a source of current illiberal trends.

When I see calls for a technocracy, I can only shake my head. When has that worked ever? Technocratic government that governs in a manner to determine end results - which is what people typically mean when they refer to technocracy - has worked well exactly when and where? One case scenario is failure due to world being far more complex than some people appreciate, and the technocracy running into that hard wall we call reality, causing things to mostly not go as planned and create huge unintended consequences. Typical case scenario is capture by interested parties, and that segment of society being run in the interests of said parties. Sometimes this ends up carrying benefits to the larger body politic to one degree or another as a sort of fait accompli, but shouldn't be confused with good governance.

Fundamentally, our downward spiral can only be reversed if people somehow, on a large scale, realize the inherent dangers of directing government to work towards certain ends - as opposed to simply determining the rules of just conduct in terms of regulating and enforcing the means people might use to achieve their own ends. The more power government has to manage society, the higher the bar becomes in terms of the people you need to operate it successfully - including the voters themselves.

On a rare occasion, certain programs or aspects of technocratic governance may work. Just like certain Kingdoms and Empires occasionally benefitted from enlightened and capable rulers, that combined with favorable circumstances and luck, ushered in temporary periods of prosperity. But just like those Kingdoms and Empires typically were not successful, so too will technocracy fail in the long run, and to mostly the same ratio and for mostly the same reasons.

The danger here, is modern technology has given those who wield power far more control over the lives of the masses than that enjoyed by your typical medieval monarchy in a great many ways. This is frightening, and ensures that once the path of human history falls off the path laid forth by our ancestors and the disciples of the Enlightenment, turning back will difficult if not impossible. The future is a very dark dystopia, that we are heading towards with the best of intentions.

For who could be free when every other man's humour might domineer over him? - John Locke (2nd Treatise, sect 57)