1 Topic by Justinian I (edited by Justinian I 21-Aug-2008 23:51:36)

  • Posts: 3,373

Topic: Meritocracy

Meritocracy is the principle that people who merit political power, measured by their talents and accomplishments, should exercise it. This principle was practiced to some extent by the Romans and First French Empire, and to great effect. It enabled government to function optimally by delivering good service, and some of the best times in human history resulted when talented and accomplished people were in power. Even the Chinese instituted a system of scholar officials under various dynasties that initially allowed unprecedented social mobility and rewarded officials by merit (yes I know it collapsed it to inheritance, but that was because they didn't do it right).

However, liberals HATE meritocracy. Why is this? I don't get it. It's a very utilitarian principle to put in to effect.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 7,941
  • Tag points: 14

Re: Meritocracy

Ok so in this example Bill Gates should be President and Warren Buffet the vice president then?

Everything bad in the economy is now Obama's fault. Every job lost, all the debt, all the lost retirement funds. All Obama. Are you happy now? We all get to blame Obama!
Kemp currently not being responded to until he makes CONCISE posts.
Avogardo and Noir ignored by me for life so people know why I do not respond to them. (Informational)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,373

Re: Meritocracy

> Einstein wrote:

> Ok so in this example Bill Gates should be President and Warren Buffet the vice president then?

According to this principle, Bill Gates' and Warren Buffet's expertise are in entrepreneurship not public administration and foreign policy.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 7,941
  • Tag points: 14

Re: Meritocracy

I beg to differ. Their skills are in executive leadership, and that is the job of a President.

Everything bad in the economy is now Obama's fault. Every job lost, all the debt, all the lost retirement funds. All Obama. Are you happy now? We all get to blame Obama!
Kemp currently not being responded to until he makes CONCISE posts.
Avogardo and Noir ignored by me for life so people know why I do not respond to them. (Informational)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

5 Reply by Justinian I (edited by Justinian I 22-Aug-2008 00:03:24)

  • Posts: 3,373

Re: Meritocracy

> Einstein wrote:

> I beg to differ. Their skills are in executive leadership, and that is the job of a President.>>

In business, not public administration. Some of their skills I'm sure cross over though, and added with their intelligence they could probably learn how to do it very fast.

Romney, however, would be president given the other Republican alternatives. Not sure if you like Romney though, but I do because I value merit.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 7,941
  • Tag points: 14

Re: Meritocracy

I do, I wanted him as my parties candidate. I lost.

Everything bad in the economy is now Obama's fault. Every job lost, all the debt, all the lost retirement funds. All Obama. Are you happy now? We all get to blame Obama!
Kemp currently not being responded to until he makes CONCISE posts.
Avogardo and Noir ignored by me for life so people know why I do not respond to them. (Informational)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,093
  • Tag points: 54

Re: Meritocracy

I wanna put something in this thread but I can't phrase it properly so I'll just mention Pierre Bourdieu and his work on "cultural capital" (plus social and economic capital should be mentioned).

All these work to supersede meritocracy.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,373

Re: Meritocracy

Yeah, the Republican voting base is committed to ideology not pragmatism. They would sooner vote for a committed Christian with a low IQ who stands by his principles under all circumstances, than they would someone who is a brilliant public executive and administrator but is willing to compromise his principles when the circumstances require it.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

9 Reply by Justinian I (edited by Justinian I 22-Aug-2008 00:46:46)

  • Posts: 3,373

Re: Meritocracy

> ☠ARFeh☠ wrote:

> I wanna put something in this thread but I can't phrase it properly so I'll just mention Pierre Bourdieu and his work on "cultural capital" (plus social and economic capital should be mentioned).

All these work to supersede meritocracy.>>

The theory does not supercede meritocracy. It describes power inequality based on acquisitions of three kinds of capital, and different political and economic systems set the means of how such capital is obtained. In our democratic system, politicans can gain more capital by pleasing their constituents, lobbyists, sponsors, and their peers. The more capital they have through these means (which is not a judge of merit), the higher office they can hold as well as enjoy a higher income.

In a meritocracy, however, capital would be acquired by merit. Merit would give you more capital, and the higher your value the higher the office you could hold.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

> Justinian I wrote:

> Yeah, the Republican voting base is committed to ideology not pragmatism. They would sooner vote for a committed Christian with a low IQ who stands by his principles under all circumstances, than they would someone who is a brilliant public executive and administrator but is willing to compromise his principles when the circumstances require it.
_________________________________________________________________
Why can't we just have someone who is a brilliant public executive and administrator who is also never willing to compromise his principles when circumstances try pressuring him to do so,
including pressure from the majority of the public and/or lobbyists, and/or any other group of people or organizations? (whether he/she is Christian or not) big_smile

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,373

Re: Meritocracy

Because effectiveness corresponds with adaptability. Moral and ideological principles often contradict adaptability.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

Adaptability is not always a beneficial thing for humanity.
For individual humans (and those who knowingly help them) who implement the bad type of adaptability, it sorta is beneficial.
But not for everyone else.
For them it's detrimental.
...that type of adaptability is pure selfishness, greed, arrogance, etc.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

13 Reply by Gladiator (edited by Gladiator 22-Aug-2008 01:48:22)

  • Posts: 2,144
  • Tag points: 25

Re: Meritocracy

I can't believe i actually to some degree agree with Einstein yikes

look what you've done justin sad

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Soth
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 473

Re: Meritocracy

unfortunately that system would completely undermine our system of a democratically elected government taking away the freedom of the people to decide who they want to lead.  really it takes a large amount of merit to convince people to vote you into a high public office.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.
                                          Thomas Jefferson

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 0

Re: Meritocracy

How about the person that is voted in to presidency, do what the people want, regardless of his own beliefs or politics.
and do as he/she should, and serve the peoples civil liberties, instead of his/her own parties financial gains.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

> BC Cougar wrote:

> How about the person that is voted in to presidency,
1) do what the people want, regardless of his own beliefs or politics.
and
2) do as he/she should, and serve the peoples' civil liberties, instead of his/her own parties financial gains.
________________________________________
I fully agree with #2, not #1.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 0

Re: Meritocracy

should a mayor have political issues, i say no, the mayor should do what better serves what the majority of the people want done.
if you have a public office then you should in turn serve the public, not the minority.
i believe the same of a president.
just like leader of a family in IC, you are not all powerful, you serve the better good of the family, not your own.
and if you win anything, it was all of you that won, not the leader.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

I SEE THERE ARE 2 DIFFERENT VIEWS HERE OF WHAT DEMOCRACY IS:

1)  a leader/gov't voted in by the majority to do what the majority thinks is best for everyone even if it's totally opposite to what he/she wants.
or
2)  a leader/gov't voted in by the majority to do what the leader/gov't thinks is best for everyone, regardless of whether or not it's also what he/she wants or the speed he wants it done.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 0

Re: Meritocracy

well in a perfect world........... which doesn't exist.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

You might want to reread the 2nd option I listed
(i thought it would disagree with your perspective;))

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Soth
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 473

Re: Meritocracy

that first option you gave newb is completely ludicrous.  Why would someone voluntarily put himself up for office to do something that is totally against what he believes in! and why would someone vote for him if they know that is how he feels?!

the second option also doesnt make sense but i think thats just because you are being very general.

In matters of style, swim with the current;
In matters of principle, stand like a rock.
                                          Thomas Jefferson

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,985
  • Tag points: 373

Re: Meritocracy

"However, liberals HATE meritocracy. Why is this? I don't get it. It's a very utilitarian principle to put in to effect."

There are 2 kinds of liberals, the anglo saxon kind, where it's a name for leftists, and the term we use in europe, where it is a economic set of minds that strife for an adam smith-like economy. I don't think the latter one is not really against a meritocracy, but it would never voice that as it would only cost them votes.
It's been done for ages, this meritocracy., Medieval and early modern cities often were meritocracies. It only works for a certain time, until it leads to oligarchy. A group that holds the economic and political party tends to favour it's own needs and regard all others as less important, wich again leads to fanatic coups. As I did some research on this, I suggest you read "patterns of urban rebellion" (no worries, it's not a long article) by Haemers and Dumolyn. It gives you a very good idea of how it worked.

God: Behold ye angels, I have created the ass.. Throughout the ages to come men and women shall grab hold of these and shout my name...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 2,163

Re: Meritocracy

alan already said most of what I want to say. smile

You're always comming up with WHO would be the best leader be justinian, wich is a valid question. However, you never talk about HOW that leader or leaders should be picked. Cause that is the tricky part. (as WFS pointed out)

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Posts: 3,985
  • Tag points: 373

Re: Meritocracy

When I think of it, there has never been a meritocracy that didn't change into an oligarchy..

God: Behold ye angels, I have created the ass.. Throughout the ages to come men and women shall grab hold of these and shout my name...

0 Dislike 0 Post Points

  • Newb
  • Newb
  • Player
  • Offline
  • Posts: 514

Re: Meritocracy

> Soth wrote:

> that first option you gave newb is completely ludicrous.  Why would someone voluntarily put himself up for office to do something that is totally against what he believes in! and why would someone vote for him if they know that is how he feels?!

the second option also doesnt make sense but i think thats just because you are being very general.
__________________________
I wasn't saying I support the 1st option (in fact I'm against it) but I've noticed many people do support it.
Except for the leader...heh.

You are correct on your assumption of the 2nd option.

"I will fight for your right to be wrong!" << S.G. Tallentyre
"I am a flexible centrist: not stuck on right-wing, not stuck on left-wing, and not stuck on centre...and I don't flip-flop either" <<< me tongue
Fighting for peace is like stopping the raping of a virgin.

0 Dislike 0 Post Points