"Regardless of who wins the US election, one thing is certain: it will be a victory for the meritocracy." Opening line from the very interesting article below by Stan Grant.


Meritocracy a word first coined by the sociologist Michael Dunlop Young in his work "The Rise of the Meritocracy" in 1958. Meaning; [a society governed by people selected according to merit].

Like America is Australia in danger of being ruled by a meritocracy, or are we already in that position? Could we be such an egalitarian society that there is no possibility we could fall into such a trap?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-10-18/us-tyranny-of-merit/12774726

.. is Australia in danger of being ruled by a meritocracy, ...

? What don't I understand about this ?

certainly NZ ruled by Meritocracy.

What? We should have people running the country who lack the merit to do so? OK. That's exactly what we have now in this country - people with little or no merit. What a stupid post!

[a society governed by people selected according to merit]

Ok so, how many people will board a plane if they know the pilot doesn't know how to fly it ?
How many will go into surgery if they know the Doctor is not qualified ?
In an age where the elite keeps waffling on about the importance of education, that same elite is against merit ?
Forgive me but from where I am standing this has to be the most idiotic statement I have read in my life to-date !

Well I think employment positions should be given to the best applicant based upon the merit of their ability to do the job better than others.

And I think issues in society should be discussed on a basis of merit, not necessarily peer pressure, social engineering and mob rule.

But that doesn't necessarily mean I think 'Only university trained people have opinions worth listening to'

Is 'meritocracy' then an insidious plan to take decisions out of the hands of everyday people and into the hands of a chosen few?

But they still want to fine you if you don't vote, or don't support 'their meritocracy'

Is their meritocracy really based upon merit?

Doubtful.

You know how there's a law that governments take dormant bank accounts?
What citizen supported that?
Which one?

Them and Us

And their merit might not be the same as ours

Paul1405,

Meritocracy was posited as a functionalist theory for social organisation in which educational success is the outcome of ability and individual effort. For example, those with relatively higher IQ ratings and thus regarded as smarter would succeed because of their educational status rather than factors such as age, gender, wealth, etc.

Does that add to the understanding.

PS Actually reminds me of someone I might know ........ now what was his name?

Any policy can be hijacked & that's why we need Laws that curtail the exploitation of loopholes.
Calls for closing the loopholes would be a thousand times more sensible than going straight to the negative aspects of new policy. I have yet to hear Stan Grant advocating a lowering of the excessive salaries of bureaucrats including ABC journalists !

Well we could have a Meritocracy or we could have Victoria.

individual,

Dead right. It is idiotic. Elections are not supposed to be popularity contests; they are meant to produce people of 'merit'. Candidates are supposed to be selected by parties , on merit, and the ones with the most merit are elected.

Unfortunately, these days, people who look on politics as just another lucrative job, are mostly lacking in merit.

A 'meritocracy' is rule by "persons chosen not because of birth or wealth, but their superior talents or intellect". What could be fairer than that!

Anyone unhappy with that has a far bigger problem than just a lack of knowledge of basic English.

Australia, and the other Western countries, have not had a meritocracy for a long time, and sneering at the thought of having such a thing is the mark of an ignoramus who shoots off his mouth without thinking, usually influenced by professional whiners also lacking merit.

Squadron Leader West (aka Hasbeen nee Phil)

Sorry I don't get the joke.

Please explain for us who cannot fly.

abc journalist have been shown to be among the most incompetent or deceitful journalist in the world. It has taken Sky's Peta Credlin to uncover the Andrews government corruption and incompetence while other socialist simply provided a protection racket.

runner,

ha ha ha ha ............ Your joke is a lot funnier than SL West's joke.

Dear Paul,

A victory for the meritocracy if Trump wins?

I suspect that many of his supporters would
agree with that seeing him as a man who's succeeded
despite all sorts of grand conspiracies. They see
him as the best there is. And his message to them
is that they are doing poorly at present because they
have the cards stacked against them by cheats and
crooks (of course he excludes himself from that).
His message is if the deck is re-arranged by him ( and
he is after all a casino operator from way back) then
luck and merit will once again be allowed to play its
proper role.

If that sounds like a con. Many of the ideas attached to
the concept of meritocracy are a con. Lets not forget the
wealth and connections he inherited and had a good education.

If we don't address inequality in a democratic way we will
always find political leaders like Donald Trump who use
inequality in order to basically tell you stories.
"This is the fault of foreign workers", "This is because
of foreign countries like China," and the list goes on.
You can always blame someone. Sadly in the US by and large
the bottom and middle social groups have been neglected for
so long and today they're paying for that neglect.

cont'd ...

Dear Paul,

We should consider ourselves lucky to be living in
Australia. Some of the richest business figures in
Australia were postwar migrants from Europe.

Lowy and Grollo are still with us; the baton having
been handed on to the next generation. We've had people
here who were Holocaust survivors, others fled from
communism.

Alan Bond a British child migrant could not get into the
Royal Perth Yacht Club but he unbolted the America's
Cup from the Yanks. Members of my own family have risen
through the ranks of their chosen fields through their
hard work and talent and have contributed in various ways
to their communities. We all consider ourselves very
fortunate.

Hi Mr O,

For some of the forums old farts, understanding of how the concept of a Meritocracy is, and how it's applied in America is beyond their capacity of thought. Obviously they didn't read Stan Grant's article.

True if it was a level playing field, and things being equal the most intelligent would rise to the top and become the natural leaders, all well and good. Unfortunately in America today, those who are a privileged part of the small but elitist Meritocracy, generally through birth, a bit like the old Aristocracy, and through that accident of birth they automatically qualify for merit and therefore leadership rolls, and everything else society has to offer. Such people have inherited wealth, attend the best schools, and have access to power, through this elitist system.

The same people taunt the excluded with calls of "you to can do it, if only you would try". In the article you will see how Obama exploited that very notion, that its somehow the fault of the disadvantaged for not trying hard enough. A bit like an abled bodied man standing at the top of a very deep pit with a legless man at the bottom, yelling down; "you can jump out of the pit if only you would grow a pair of legs. When the legless chap fails to grow those legs he is scolded for not trying hard enough.

.. those who are a privileged part of the small but elitist Meritocracy, generally through birth, a bit like the old Aristocracy, and through that accident of birth they automatically qualify for merit and therefore leadership rolls, and everything else society has to offer.

Paul1405,
Exactly how Academia has been working over the past 40 years ! Academia is the new Tories !

Dear Paul,

I've just come across an interesting article that I
want to share. It raises some valid points regarding
meritocracy.

We're told that - "having a smart president (or CEO)
and the best brains in the room at the White House
(or company board room) is not guarantee of a
trumphal presidency (or the company) being a success or
good for the country (or the organisation) especially
if the president (or the CEO) does not listen to his
advisors".

Also, "while it is obviously better to have smart people
than less astute men and women trying to figure out answers
to current challenges. It offers no certainty that serious
problems will be solved - ov even that the right decisions
would be made".

The article gives clear examples when having smart people
did not lead to either promised or anticipated solution.
It's worth a read:

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/12/18/why-the-best-and-brightest-are-often-the-dimmest-and-worst-at-governing/

Paul1405,

Echoes of C. Wright Mills' 'The Power Elite'.

Have you caught 'On Becoming A God In Central Florida' TV series with Kirsten Dunst still streaming on SBS until end October?

It's binge worthy.

It is a left thing Paul.

It's the left that inhabit the DC swamp. privilege & academia wallowing together, with their greeny accomplices.

It is the left who long to form an aristocracy, With Hillary to follow Bill, & now some idiots suggesting Michelle to Barack Obama. The last thing a country is any one who has so little taste that they could marry either of them.

Of course some idiots could imagine academic prowess is similar to actual real world savvy. Now that would be disastrous.

I think there's a serious problem for people to see the huge difference between the few valuable & real Academics & Scholars & the countless Uni indoctrinated who also call themselves Academics but aren't anywhere near that calibre. Just like their predecessors of yesteryear, the Tories !
I think Academia needs to come up with a more proper description to distance itself from the many pointless & increasingly unaffordable Pseudo-Academics who give everyone a bad name !

pseudo-individual,

Are you speaking from experience?

Or did this come to you in a dream?

Individual,

Could you please be more specific and tell us who
you are referring to as "pseudo academics" and ones
who in your opinion are "real academics". Kindly
explain the differences. Also what do you mean by
the term - "academic"?

Hasbeen,

Could you also explain who are the "Left" who inhabit
the DC swamp? And why do you think that Hilary Clinton
or Michelle Obama are academics?

Kindly explain.

Foxy,

You have more chance of getting blood out of a stone.

Hasbeen,

You spoke about "aristocracy" in American politics.

The Kennedys, The Bushs, The Clintons and their dashed
hopes - Americans are not strangers to political
dynasties. However, Donald Trump Jr, and Ivanka are the
ones vying for their father's job in 2024.

Mr O,

I may not be able to get any blood - but hopefully
I shall be able to get some salt water.

Hi Foxy,

I might be arguing from a prospective that is not that clear. Both Trump and Biden as well as the Obama's, Clinton's and Bushes and many before them Kennedy, Roosevelt etc etc, have the commonality in that they all came from, and are/were part of the Meritocracy. In power these people surround themselves with others like themselves, not that they have a choice, as the system does not afford choice. Like Aristocrats, this group is exclusive, these people become the "best and brightest" not through some kind of equality of competitiveness with all others, but in most instances through birth. Society can only have the "best and the brightest" only if those people have achieved that status through equality, not through some unearned dubious merit.

Imagine how better off society would be if equality in education, and opportunity was afforded to all, the "best and brightest" would truly be the best and brightest.

Kindly explain the differences ..
Foxy,
If you can't already see that difference then no amount of explaining can make you see !

Foxy,
Actually, a way of explaining would be a comparison between a first year apprentice & a fully qualified tradesperson.
The difference being that the Academics I'm on about are permanent first year ! I hope that helps.

Individual,

Academia is the worldwide group composed of professors
and researchers at institutes of higher learning.

You seem to be confused in your terminology.

I hope that helps you.

Academia is the worldwide group composed of professors
and researchers at institutes of higher learning.
Foxy,
we all know that, what you don't appear to know is that only a very small percentage of them are of actual benefit to society ! A great many of them are simply hangers-on who only dream up useless crap like PC & treating crims with kids gloves etc. & all the other silly ideas plaguing our society !
They too call themselves Academics !

Foxy,

You seem to be forgetting to include all the Lecturers and Tutors at a university.

They are academics as well.

My understanding is that academica means the teaching staff at a university.

My understanding is that academica means the teaching staff at a university.
Mr opinion,
There you go. So, who is doing all the anti conservatism indoctrination in Unis ?
You're an Academic by your own hinting & open hostility to conservative Govt so, what exactly are you getting paid for by us taxpayers ?

pseudo-individual,

I'm not an academic.

It never appealed to me to want to be an academic.

I was always just happy to become one of the most educated and smartest guys in the country.

I was always just happy to become one of the most educated and smartest guys in the country.
Mr Opinion,
That's nice so, who thinks that much of you that they pay you to make a living from your education & smartness ?

pseudo--individual,

I don't do it for the money.

I get satisfaction from just knowing that I am one of the most educated and smartest guys in the country.

It's all about ME.

It's a really nice feeling knowing that I am one of the most educated and smartest guys in the country.

Something that you will never experience.

Individual,

You need to be more specific. Sweeping generalisations
don't do it for most rational people. Give us some
fact based evidence of academics who are doing
indoctrinations. That would go a long way towards
credibility. The same goes for the high salaries that
you assert academics get.

cont'd ...

Individual,

It might be useful to read the following link:

http://canberratimes.com.au/story/6938720/the-crisis-in-australian-universities-is-deliberate-and-demoralising/

Foxy,

Please enough ........... You know he can't answer the questions.

If you keep pestering him about it you will only make him cry.

BTW Have you been catching the news re the alleged Vatican's GET OUT OF JAIL SLUSH FUND allegedly for George Pell.

All alleged of course. But apparently the AFP and Victorian police are looking into it.

Someone's been a naughty boy again!

Mr O,

No I haven't - but I'll look into it.

Thanks.

Foxy,

I think I got my wires crossed.

Apparently the money wasn't for getting him out but for putting him in.

Foxy,
You're only trying to win a technical point whereas I'm looking at it from a morally justifiable point !
Too many people costing the rest of us too much for nothing !

It's a really nice feeling knowing that I am one of the most educated and smartest guys in the country.
Mr Opinion,
Sounds as though you've convinced yourself of that already but, when will you start proving it to Us ?
I have yet to see any proposals from you for getting our youths off Welfare & into meaningful jobs that help bring manufacturing back to this country ! After all, someone will need to pay for your & Paul1405's Superannuation Just as us oldies here have paid for your parents' !

Individual,

This is not about point scoring.

This is about evidence-based facts.

Read the link I gave before you make any other
statements.

I would love to agree with you, but then we'd
both be wrong.

"morally justifiable point" Indy cut the crap. You simply lash out at certain sections of the community because of your past failings. Some time back, you hinted you were for a brief time employed in the public service, a brief time, yep no doubt a failure and dismissed due to incompetence brought on by your general lack of education, hence your dislike of academia, who pervade the very institutions you were excluded from in your younger day due to your lack of intelligence. Unfortunately there is nothing Foxy, Mr O or myself can do about that.

Individual,

I don't know any youths on welfare. The ones
I know have jobs and work hard. Of course they're
prepared to work at anything, and move anywhere
rather than rest on their laurels and be supported
by the government. It's a cultural thing. The way
they were raised. Having a strong work ethic helps.
As does being self-reliant.

And BTW - no oldies on this forum ever paid for anything
for my parents. They, like their children - worked for
everything they had/have. They made sure they had enough
for their old age. They never asked for anything from
anybody.

We obviously live in two different worlds.

Hmmh, must have hit a nerve with our resident intellectuals ! As the saying goes, the truth hurts !

Individual,

In order for you to hit anything you would have
to remove your blinkers.

But of course you don't see the big picture.
How can you with such a small screen.

Hi Foxy,

Our friend Indy has a huge sense of entitlement, he doesn't receive aged welfare, oh no, he likes to think of it as an aged pension, something he is entitled to because of past taxpaying. The sad true is, previous governments never made provision for the future payment of pensions. What Indy receives is welfare paid by todays taxpayers and government borrowings. Greens such as myself do not support a system of welfare that is unsustainable in the long term. What Indy doesn't realise is if Australia had created a decent national superannuation scheme post WWII, he and millions of others like him would be far better off today than they are on aged welfare. Unfortunately conservative governments because of philosophical reasons opposed national supa, and they still do today, thus the argument over an additional half a percent contribution.

The hangers-on are ganging up !

Welcome to the forum
Where anachronism rules
Where tribal antiquated oldies
Think that they are cool

The forum used to be
An interesting place
Today its full of nasties
And postings in-your-face

Back in their olden days
They went to pubs to fight
Today what with COVID
They can't even drive

So they come onto the forum
To vent their little spleens
Against the Leftie commies
And other vile extremes

But that's not all we have folks
There's much more to be seen
There's many other people
Who are also really keen

There are those who feel its important
To set the record straight
With fact based evidence
To help out a mate

So like it or lump it
The forum will remain
A place where people
Argue over their terrain.

Foxy,

We're here for the politics not the poetry.

Those with no retort resort to ridicule !

pseudo-individual,

There you go again, saying things none of us can make any sense of.

Individual,

Ridicule in your case is so easy to do.

Mr O,

Poetry is a political act because it involves
telling the truth.

To paraphrase John F. Kennedy:

"If more politicians knew poetry ...
perhaps the world would be a better place to live".

Foxy,

Do you think he read love poems to Marilyn Monroe in front of the fire on those cold winter nights?

Foxy & Mr Opinion,
You're hell-bent on proving me right every time ! Cheers for that !

pseudo-individual,

There you go again, saying things none of us can make any sense of.

Mr O,

I don't think that Individual even knew Marilyn Monroe.
(smile).

maybe he read poetry with the many women he snuck in the white house. Maybe that is what attracted women to him.

I don't think that poetry had anything to do with
the attraction that John F. Kennedy had for
women. He simply was a "hottie" and he didn't need
an orange face, a comb-over, or rude, sexist or
callous behaviour to score points.

I reckon kennedy was overrated. IMO, LBJ was uglier, but more effective, apart form Vietnam problems.

But Foxy, it is great you r into poetry and good looks. Everyone needs a vice.

Hi Chris,

I'm into much more than that dear heart.
You have no idea!

cont'd ...

Hi Chris,

As for All The Way with LBJ?

Nah - he had a bowl problem ( constipation).
And used to leave the toilet door open while
conducting meetings. A big turn off for all
concerned.

Foxy,

LBJ was actually something of a visionary and social reformer who had his heart in the right place and great intentions of righting a lot of wrongs but unfortunately he struggled to achieve his aims in the face of incredible social upheavals that plagued his presidency, particularly the running of the Vietnam War which he had inherited from his predecessor.

PS Is that true that he was known to suffer from an ailment or just a joke?

cont'd ...

Chris,

Sorry for the typo,

I meant to say he had a bowel problem.

Mr O,

LBJ suffered from various ailments - kidney
stones, gall bladder heart condition and
his digestive tract problems. Yet he still
managed to work 18 hours a day. Amazing man.
He managed to pass a great deal of legislation -
Clean Air Act, Civil Rights Act, Social Security
Amendment, and create two government-run health
care programs - Medicare and Medicaid.

Suffered several massive heart-attacks during his
lifetime - but couldn't give up smoking.

I am not into looks, poetry, who is a womanizer, and who has bowel problems.

I am only into policy outcomes.

LBJ used his political skills to get a lot done, overcoming opposition in the south

I have a photo of myself holding the speargun Johnson presented to Harold Holt.
No toilets involved !
Does this qualify as claim to fame ;-)

pseudo-individual,

Only if you get swallowed by a whale while out spearfishing.

And everybody is now eager for you to go spearfishing ............ I hope you're getting as excited about the outcome as we are.

"LBJ used his political skills to get a lot done, overcoming opposition in the south."
Not sure it counts if you murder your predecessor

Armchair Critic,

I heard it was Martians.

The dead JFK is only a surrogate and the real Kennedy was abducted by the Martians and is being held for ransom on the red planet.

The ransom? You guessed it .......... they want the corpse of Marilyn Monroe which they intend to bring back to life and make their queen.

Then there's your explanation that LBJ was the other shooter.

Hi AC,

The evidence points to Kennedy being assassinated by the American Mafia. Were they subcontracted by the power elite we'll never know. I recall Johnson's visit to Sydney, and the government printed placards with the slogan "All the way with LBJ", Yankee flags being handed out to the crowd. I was in the city that day protesting the warmongers presence, when a girl threw red paint at the septic tanks car. Inside that scum bucket of a political thief Robin Askin was reported as saying "run over the bastards". It was the sickening sight of Aussies paying homage to the war criminal Johnson that set me on the path of protest against the Vietnam War, and Australia's involvement in that grubby American war

I'd imagine Paul1405 would even denounce his parents if they asked him to do something that would help others !

Indy, "help others" do you call butchering innocent Vietnamese men, women and children as helping others. It might have helped the American Military/Industrial Complex, but it didn't do much for the Vietnamese. Did you not say that during those days you were able to dodge the draft? When did you do National Service? Never! Just trying to push our young into it today, whilst you're snug and comfee, living of government welfare, tut tut the truth may hurt.

Australian soldiers haven't learnt, but like their war crimes in other years, murdering innocent Afghan's in 2012 by "our boys" is yet to be fully exposed. All will one day be revealed despite efforts by the political warmongers and top army brass to cover up.

Why anyone responds to this blokes fake news is a mystery.

ttbn,

Are you talking about Trump?

Paul1405 appears to be one of those people who'd castrate themselves because other people have too many children !

Firstly both Foxy and the ABC have got the wrong interpretation of "merit".

Merit is not sheer IQ or being rich and wealthy, it is being "deserving" and admirable. Being smart is no guarantee of success but smart people are generally far more successful.

Electing people based on merit is essentially what everyone tries to do with the difference being in what each voter decides is admirable.

shadyminister,

Can you read?

She's talking about 'meritocracy' not 'merit'.

This is a concept coined by British sociologist Michael Young in 'The Rise of Meritocracy' published in the 1950s.

Discussing sociology is something that is well above your paid grade.

I suggest you stop pretending you are educated and stick to being just an engineer.

At least you have afforded an opportunity for everyone to see that you are definitely no Arts graduate.

But don't let it get you down. Maybe your fellow engineer Sq. Leader West (aka Hasbeen) will take you for a spin in one of his imaginary fighter jets.

Swamp donkey,

I realise that as an environmental sociologist (a wank title if ever I heard one) literacy is not as essential as the ability to flip burgers, but Meritocracy being defined as:

"government or the holding of power by people selected according to merit."

The definition of merit is key to the whole concept. Foxy incorrectly defines it as being smart and the ABC incorrectly defines it as being a member of the "elite" to push some ill-defined agenda.

I would suggest buying a dictionary

shadyminister,

Sounds like the sort of definition that your crowd of MBAs come up with trying to make themselves look smart by borrowing from fields like sociology and anthropology and giving borrowed terms their own particular meaning that suits what you vocationally trained people do.

You might be able to fool people in the vocational fields like engineering, accountancy, business, etc. but when it comes to the Arts areas the concepts are well above your pay grade.

Stick to being just an engineer and we will all be happy.

I could suggest you read Young's monograph but you wouldn't get past the first paragraph.

Swamp donkey,

I seriously doubt that you have come within a country mile of my pay grade. People generally get paid in proportion to what they deliver to their customers or their employers which is a basic merit system.

Gay no longer means happy and meritocracy no longer means what young originally intended. Language evolves which if you were literate you would grasp.

As for Young's tale of a dystopia founded on merit which I understand is 1984 on valium the question is not whether I can read it but whether I want to.

Perhaps you should read "the fountainhead" and other books by Ayn Rand that describe distopias founded not on merit.

Mr Opinion,
Can you name an intellectual that has had any positive influence in society ?

pseudo-individual,

Yes, I can name plenty of smart people who have had an influence.

shadyminister,

It's no use entering into discourse with you because you lack the knowledge and training that one needs to discuss the Arts things like history, sociology, archaeology, anthropology, philosophy, etc. that I am qualified in.

I might as well talk to a six year old on these subjects rather than discuss them with you because in these areas your IQ is that of a five year old.

Swamp donkey,

Every time you post you tap a new vein of stupidity. IQ (intelligence quotient) is a measure of distributed intelligence and a child of 5 who has an IQ of 150 will most probably become an adult with an IQ of 150, so saying that I have the IQ of a 5-year-old is as moronic as it is meaningless.

I am also amazed at your obvious insecurities that have driven you to collect a series of unchallenging pieces of paper which given your frequent blunders indicate that achievement was purely based on attendance.

I see now that a 6 year old would give you a good thrashing intellectually.

shadyminister,

I actually feel sorry for you.

For your information IQ is assessed against some imaginary 21 year old. It is one's knowledge relative to that datum.

For example, someone with an IQ of 100 has the same level of knowledge and someone with IQ of 120 has 20% more knowledge.

I doubt if a 5 year old will have an IQ of 100 unless he/she knows as much as the average person.

You would have a 5 year old's IQ if measured specifically with respect to the Arts things like history, sociology, anthropology, archaeology, philosophy, etc.

Simply because you have no knowledge and training in those fields.

Get it now?

Swamp Donkey,

Your stupidity knows no bounds. Please read some basic information on IQ before completely stuffing it up yet again:

https://www.sciencenewsforstudents.org/article/what-iq-and-how-much-does-it-matter
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligence_quotient

IQ is a measure of reasoning ability and not knowledge. This should be basic stuff for sociology.

shadyminister,

An engineer told me it was to do with knowledge.

Last time I listen to an engineer - bunch of you know whats! "Here chook chook chook chook chook ...... "

Swamp Donkey,

Now you're just lying.

plenty of smart people who have had an influence.
Mr Opinion,
Yes I know but I specifically asked you to name a positive one & you couldn't !

pseudo-individual,

You don't need to know. It has no relevance to your life.

Now go back to the sofa and watch the football.

Mr Opinion,
It must be just about unbearable not to be able to answer such a simple question !
Ah, being educated !