Meritocracy

Explain to me how a society based on how well you perform and your own ability isn't the best thing for this world, Sup Forums.

Other urls found in this thread:

pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-report_artfinal.pdf
twitter.com/AnonBabble

I am pretty sure everyone thinks it is, except liberals, SJWs and commies.

Uhh this is a white male hugbox and circlejerk. No one will argue this

Humans are too nepotistic for this to happen.

>explain how a one word system isn't the best

Because your idea of a meritocracy is not everybody else's idea of a meritocracy.

Thats why you need an objective unguided system which selects the necessary traits. Like capitalism, which is the natural meritocracy.

I can't. No one who is intellectually honest can. It is the reason why we as a species have gotten as far as we have. Only those that can't compete will disagree, and if we let them control the dialogue then it will be to the destruction of all humanity,

Being good at something does make one a just person.

Rule of the best might not be rule of the morally right.

is that a photo of Alex Jones?

Because 95% of anything is crap, including people.

Case in point: this board

Meritocracies are great until you need to pool resources and share.

Then they get complicated.

That's why sharing only within a relatively homogenous gene pool is important, and keeping that gene pool as high quality as possible.

>Like capitalism, which is the natural meritocracy.
It is not.

life is a game and it is extremely competitive. The weak only wish to lower the competition, because they cannot compete.

human beings are animals, and like all animals we are naturally inclined to cheat, lie, steal, and decieve our way to sucess. To believe that a meritocracy would work is is just as dumb as believing that true REAL SOCIALISM will work. People just won't trust one another enough to do so.

How precisely not?

There is no such thing as a real meritocracy when people can be born into differing financial and family situations that give automatic advantages to some over others. A kid who grows up in poverty in a decaying rust belt town to alcoholic parents doesn't get access to the same opportunities as a kid who grows up in a house with wealthy, well-adjusted parents who have lots of connections to help their kids get ahead.

Thats a good point.

this

I personally dont see major connections between opportunity and ability. The beauty of the life is that anyone can make anything for themselves.

Only the weak (women, faggots, retards, etc.) are against meritocracy, because they know they can't compete. The saddest part is that they don't hate being weak, they simply hate that there are others who are better (stronger) than them.

No, but that kid has his life to make of it what he will. If he's driven and stays focused, he can easily surpass that upper class kid. And it does happen, people who are born dirt poor are often times even more driven, and do very well in life

Sengoku Japan was a Meritocracy. The idea is in no way unique to whites.

Because sometimes shitskins would outperform some whites and then we'd still have them around

Cheating and lying are all part of the game, user. You gotta rise above if you're gonna succeed. Or get better at it than everyone else.

you have complete freedom of will you pussy, you may not have complete freedom of thought, but there's nothing stopping you from taking, destroying, or creating, but yourself.

man up faggot, you only get out what you put in.

I'm not saying I dislike capitalism, but a free market doesn't care about how much work you put into something or how well you perform. Just how useful you are to other people.

I wouldn't say that, I personally hate it when I'm not the absolute best- biggest, fastest, strongest, "smartest", ect.

best motivation is jealousy.

A child of an upper class family will almost always have a better life than an average person even if the average person would be a lot better at doing a certain job simply because of the connections of the parents.
Also corruption,cronyism,etc.
Such things will almost always be present in capitalism because in a capitalistic system money is the most important factor and if you have enough money you can do almost anything.

usefulness and effectiveness are practically the same.

it doesn't happen nearly enough for this to be a valid arguement

this

I prefer not lying when the outcome is the same anyways.

so what? Their family established themselves and at one point in time, their predecessor had nothing. You can cry about fair, but it doesn't change anything, it's just crying.

man up faggot.

What can theoretically happen and what does statistically happen in the large majority of cases are very different things. You can call it social Darwinism if you want, everyone just gets what they get and they have to do what they can, but it's not a meritocracy when people can be born with a whole host of advantages that they didn't earn themselves.

Small animals band together to kill larger animals. That's the way of nature.

Cheating and lying is not beneficial to society. The point of a meritocracy is to place the most capable people in leadership/critical positions.
If cheating and lying are part of the game it ceases to be a meritocracy.

>Answer: Genetics, powerlifting, and steroids

>I personally dont see major connections between opportunity and ability.
Maybe in 1900, nowadays you can't get anywhere without at least a degree.

>you have complete freedom of will you pussy
You honestly believe free will exists? Where is the evidence?

Lol. The policies needed to prop a meritocracy will make u fags run away from it. Whatever 'meritocracy' there is in the real world is exactly what Micheal Young feared when he coined the term in "The Rise of Meritocracy"

Not a meritocracy.

Because it favors the people who access better training.

Ironically, globalization is the ultimate meritocracy. The marketplace is open to all and the best man wins.

But for the uneducated American worker that meant the Japanese came and took your auto industry because they did it better. China took your manufacturing industry because they did it cheaper and Mexicans took everything else because you won't work for that little.

Uneducated Amerifats can survive in a real meritocracy.

To honestly evaluate the question, we will need some examples of meritocratic and non-meritocratic systems.

The archetypal meritocracy is probably China under the civil service exam system, where the leaders were selected based on, among other things, their knowledge of classic poetry. Some philistines and communists argue that this was unfairly biased towards the children of the wealthy (as they could afford liberal arts degrees, while everyone else had to make do with STEM careers - housebuilding, metalworking, etcetera).

Other well-known meritocracies include the Soviet Union, where positions dependended primarily upon your personal ability to obtain support within the Communist Party, and corporate America, where success depends largely on your skill at gladhanding venture capitalists. Then there are genetic meritocracies, such as North Korea, Rome under the Caesars, or France prior to the revolution - to simplify the task of detecting a good ruler, the position is simply allocated to the descendant of the last successful ruler.

Meritocracy is, in short, a nice _ideal_ - but the fact that most people cannot agree on what merits should be measured in the first place make it rather difficult to put into practice.

Shitting in the streets is also the way of nature. And yet we poo in loo.

cry about it, you have complete freedom of will. You are choosing to cry about when right now you could be out producing something for profit or just simply improving your overall stock value.

You're my strawman for this argument. Also, you're not destitute, all it takes is a little resource to snowball the rest.

Because feelings!

Because those are vague terms. Who decided what is the best or what is a job well done.

>you have complete freedom of will
There you go, spouting that meme again. He has no such thing, because it doesn't exist.

what's stopping you from killing yourself? Whats stopping you from killing your entire family? mutilating things, debauchery, ect.

If you think anything is holding you back you're in denial

Why are you trying to personalize a generalized argument? I'm not talking about me, and the fact that you keep trying to make it about me just makes you look like an edgy teenager. Grow up a little.

So go out and get your degree then. Nobody is stopping you except yourself, no matter the circumstances of your birth.

If ooga booga was born in Botswana in a mud hut and feels the stagnancy of his peers then he has every ability, now more than ever, to go and make something of himself.

Define a fucking meritocracy.

A society where blacks and mestizos gulp up valuable resources when it come to law enforcement and infrastructure, while still getting the same opportunities?

A society that isn't built around preserving a high quality gene pool is doomed whatever system it adopts.

>ITT: Retards think meritocracy means making the best of what you've got
Protip: It's not a meritocracy if people don't have equal opportunities.

Because actual meritocracy would involve abolishing inheritance.
And genetics give you an interval of performance, but your surroundings and upbringing define the outcome.
That is the idealistic answer.

The reality is that those filthy rich and in power prefer to stay that way, and to keep all of it for their descendants, relatives and kin. Connections, background, surname, ancestry etc. are used as well.
Aristocracy vs. democracy vs. oligarchy issue was known to ancient Greeks.

>what's stopping you
My genetic and environmental programming, same as any other animal.

>have no education because poor
>have to work many hours
>can't afford nor have time to get a degree
>hurr durr go out and get a degree then
such is life on the neoliberal planet

wew

What this motherfucker said. If the State cannot guarantee or at least try to enforce equality of opportunity, it is not meritocracy

A meritocracy is a system where everyone gets an equal opportunity and his success is dependent only on his merit, not on inherited conditions.
This is the original idea of liberalism. You're free to try your luck without being hindered by poverty or whatever.
This is also the idea behind the welfare state: Since everyone has access to basic needs, everyone has an equal chance at success. Switzerland does this quite well for example.

Neoliberalism is a perversion of this, since it considers you have to do with what you've got. However this means you get an advantage or disadvantage depending on your upbringing. Yes, in a way it's more "free" and deregulated than true liberalism, but it denies equal opportunity, do it's in no way a meritocracy.

It triggers the underachievers and minorities

Affirmative action is a mistake

No need for a degree, learn on the job or do trade school. Start your own business, do something with your life, there's always options whether you take them or not

Which means meritocracy cannot exist, since the state can't regulate your genes.

What's stopping you faggo?

I've grown about 14 seconds. You're my strawman, as I've said already. wealth is completely dependent on personal output. If it makes you feel any better in your vagina, I'll make a new strawman- the coal miner who's mined for 30 years and is suddenly laid off because of his worsening output has never competed, his complacency has lead to downfall. He can either whine about intangible matters of "justice" or "fairness" or he can man up and find the next best thing.

Wasting your time whining about fairness or privileges is just so; a complete waste of the only invariable resource we all have- time

it's like talking through a time machine. is this really what americans are taught?
>hurr durr work hard and you'll get somewhere
I guess people in the rust belt just all got a collective bout of laziness along the second half of the 20th century.

>can't afford nor have time to get a degree
bullshit bullshit bullshit

No man has ever worked a full time job to pay for school simultaneously.

>have no education because poor because no one in my lineage made anything of themselves
>have to work for many hours because behind in societal race
>have to make other sacrifices in life to find enough time to work and school
>hurr durr i need a full 10 hours of sleep every night and at least 4 hours of free time after work to masturbate

>What's stopping you faggo?
I already responded.

Oh alright, that sounds pretty decent actually.

>implying a community college degree = ivy league degree
D E L U D E D
E
L
U
D
E
D

The state can regulate your genes to some degree with eugenics.

Keep telling yourself that, clearly you have the will to do so.

Meritocracy inherently promotes hierarchy and those on the lower end of that hierarchy are taught by their handlers that a hierarchical model in society must devolve into slavery (which may be somewhat true in some cases) and that these low skilled, low intellect individuals should unify for the subversion of this meritocratic state in favor of a restricted emulation in which they suffer more oppression from the nepotistic elite classes but can't fight back because they're no longer being judged purely for their merit and what they can offer to the free market since it isn't free anymore by their choosing.

The payoff for this is that they are guaranteed work in positions they may not be fully qualified to hold and for the low skill group this is more than satisfactory.

They basically want to just lower the ceiling but end up locking themselves out of any higher tiers. Longer term management is a quality non existent with these people.

meritocracy is based on your personal merit, which in turn depends on your capabilities. That's the whole point of meritocracy you shlomo. Meritocracy isn't communism where everyone gets the same, it means if you're useful you get somewhere, if not, you're still fucked.

90% of millionaires are first generation rich, how is that not meritocratic? Capitalism isn't holy, but the things you said are also valid for all other systems besides capitalism only worse.

True believers are absolutely disgusting.
Whether they are about religion, Marxism, ultraliberalism, neoliberalism etc. they preach their obviously flawed and incosistent nonsense that simply doesn't stand up to scrutiny, and get all worked up when you point it out for them.

>Keep telling yourself that, clearly you have the will to do so.
Judging by your poor reasoning and aggressive phrasing, you seem low-IQ. You don't need free will to make decisions. Robots can make decisions, and we know for sure they don't have free will.

at one point in time their predecessors had nothing.

Capitalism doesn't contradict meritocracy. A meritocracy would likely be a capitalistic-like system.

Who said anything about community college?

>realize im arguing with the country that invented siesta

merit doesn't have to be capability. If you sacrificed a lot to contribute you can gain merit, but you may still be quite low in capability.

I can almost masturbate to quality posts like these.

>don't have a degree
>have to work shit job
how do you pay for a decent uni with your shit job if you don't have a good education in the first place?

Right, but that just means whoever gets dealt the best hand wins. Sure it's a "game", but there's no point in playing it, because you already know the outcome. If you're born with high IQ and high willpower, you win; if you're born with only one of those things, you're average, and if you're dumb and lazy, you lose. None of it is your choice, and it's completely arbitrary who gets born with which traits.

It's silly, IMO.

Get a useful training as electrician then or something, electronics gonna be around for some time and there is a massive shortage. If you are intelligent it should be a walk in the park. Or try to get in security, i have friends who studied or learned a language (Spanish incidentally) while on the job.

Don't you get it? T-They lost ww2 this means it's wrong!

what this guy said capabilities can be how much time you're willing to put into your work, or how apt you are at finding something you're good at, etc.. As long as you're not a full retard, IQ means jack squat.

yup, just keep rationalizing your meritocracy with some intangible qualities. Your super IQ clearly coincides with superior logic that my ape mind can't handle. A soft egg head is always more practical than strong legs huh

pewtrusts.org/~/media/assets/2015/07/fsm-irs-report_artfinal.pdf
There was a way longer paper somewhere that I read a while ago but the point is that your income can be pretty accurately predicted by the income of your parents.
That is not a meritocracy.
And I'm not arguing for any other system I was just replying to this

Get a job that requires some actual skill, learn how to do it better than others, then open your own business or rise to the top, you don't need the Uni meme to succeed in this world, it's not some magical cure-all to laziness and unwillingness to work

>become apprentice
>learn trade
>work for some time
>save money
>or work while studying
>get degree
vs
>have rich parents
>go to best uni
>have degree right away
>without so much effort since you don't have to work at the same time
you really don't see how this isn't an equal opportunity? The second example can easily reach a comfortable life never working too hard, while the first example will have to sweat like a motherfucker to get somewhere. That's not really a purely merit-based system.

Right, but your willpower is just as predetermined as your IQ. See: niggers. They never "chose" to be lazy, they were just born that way. A few were born with willpower, so they accomplish things. Either way, it's a toss-up at birth.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here.

You work friend. You're literally telling a person who is paying his way through a university on minimum wage that it can't be done.

This all under the presumption that degrees are a necessity for vertical mobility. The only one who is deluded here is you.

>You work friend. You're literally telling a person who is paying his way through a university on minimum wage that it can't be done.
>has to put much more effort in it to work while studying
>while others only have to do the studying
>doesn't see how this isn't equal opportunity
hurr durr muh freedumz

you're rationalizing an unwillingness to put in actual effort. stay weak or grow up, I don't really care what you do because I like slaves almost as much as I like competition.

Nigga please, there is no meritocracy in Singapore

>genes
Inequality in nature is okay. It is not in nuture

Sorry we live in a country based on freedom, hombre

if they never had a chance in the meritocracy, they don't lose much.

it isnt based on merit, its based on productivity

/thread

Nowhere did i say the world was fair. Look when i was a kid my mom struggled to put food on the table, worked a parttime job and mangaged to graduate college cum laude while raising kids and working. Of course it is harder and not fair but you can get there if you want, it just takes some extra time. Become the parent that can give his kids the second example.

You're retarded. Your first post in this thread was in reply to my post where I stated I don't subscribe to the pussy excuse that opportunity has some cosmic correlation with ability.

I don't care if it isn't equal opportunity. That unequal opportunity isn't anything more than a roadblock, and if you as an individual aren't capable of overcoming the roadblock then you prevented yourself from achievement right from the get go.

keep saying that to yourself if it makes you feel better.