Matt had an interesting semantic insight last weekend. "Technocrat" is a label that can be rightly applied to those who would make decisions for others based upon perceviedly superior technology; the most obvious example being economic technocrats. Once established, they can effectively rule by establishing standards of credibility; others must have the same level of technology (eg: expertise with economic models) in order to be accepted into a discussion, and having the technology implies accepting the standard of values that the technology assumes.
I think this could be effective as a meme. Pseudo-intellectuals seem to rally against perceived powers. Sometimes its government, broadly, sometimes its the economic elite. There are good reasons for rallying against both, in some cases, but there are ideal cases where there aren't. Eg: when the government only protects, and when the economic elite have earned wealth by serving others' needs.
In other words, the two groups of radicals are working to counter-purposes. Both would be better served by rallying against "Technocrats."
And what can they rally for? Liberty, dignity, and human rights.