1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Meritocracy- Political Party

Discussion in 'Inventions & New Ideas' started by Hailey, Nov 14, 2017.

  1. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Has anyone ever heard of the Meritocracy Political Party? It's a movement contrived by intj's and Intp's. I myself am an intj and have thought about these same ideas presented by Meritocracy for quite a while. I find flaws in every political system out there. I have trouble finding any flaws in this system. There is 'the movement' which is a meritocracy movement. This system can also be read about in books by Adam weishaupt, mike hockney and others. These authors are associated with the pythagorian illuminati and is again very intj/ intp oriented. Meritocracy is sort of like Plato's republic and I think those inclined towards philosophy would find it interesting.
    Daniel Delion and Ruryse like this.
  2. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    At the point where the quality of a group's members is defined, it becomes a form of collectivism, like how @andersonnnunes pointed out in this post. Meritocracy itself is an awesome idea; though as a party, it's being set up for failure.

    I can also play the devil's advocate and say – in sort of a Leibnizian way – that the oligarchs you mention in this post got into their position once because they outdid the competition, one way or another.
    Daniel Delion likes this.
  3. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    No doubt it took intellegence to get where they did and that is a merit. Their merit of character is what they lack. It takes less intellegence to keep a fortune increasing then it does to make a fortune from nothing. They have the playing field stacked against the honest people as those who get furthest in general are not good people. In a system that revolves around money it's no surprise.

    If I were in their place, I would not do the same as they are doing. I don't hold them responsible for their actions however because I don't think free will exists. It is in my nature to fight it. I don't see meritocracy as a punishment for them but rather as a system that would advance the human race and reduce suffering of humans and animals. This goal can not be accomplished while they hold such great wealth and are not using their power in a moral way.

    I see it as a crime to hold that much wealth. I think it would be much more humane for them to promote eugenics then have people trapped in a system that they are not capable of living a decent life in. Most people are not capable of any more then a life of toil and pointlessness. It's cruel. I know how negative I must sound here. What would people do if they did not think the point of life was to suffer before going to heaven? I doubt they would think life was worth living then. Each life is precious. Each life should be given an equal chance to improve themselves and be the best they can be. It's just pitiful.

    Their rule over the common man makes a rational society impossible. I can only imagine what humans could discover in science and learn about existance if this system were replaced.

    Intj's and Intp's are some of the most capable leaders btw. I wouldn't object!
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2017
  4. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member Staff Member

    You aren't in their place and they are not in yours... no matter how much they envy your position! :)

    How would you go about that...?
  5. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Meritocracy is about making a society based on reason rather then myths (religion).

    The elites could not make money from both sides of a war if whole nations were not consumed in these religions. It is wrong for them to take advantage of people who are not able to see through it.

    Science would have a foundation in mathematics, rather then religion, which would lead to truths. Peer review journals could not be influenced by money either. In a merit based government this would be illegal.

    Because the society would be based on merit rather then money, intellegence would be encouraged rather then worship of celebrities and mindlessness.

    In a merit based society, lobbying would be illegal. Only those with knowledge in a sector of life would get a vote in that sector. A head of all sectors would be elected by their peers. This is one factor that would lead to a nation full of meritious leaders. This alone would make a huge difference.
  6. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Why, and who's going to stop them? @fschmidt summed it up in this thread.

    At that point, science and mathematics becomes a religion.

    Defining what's legal and what isn't is no longer merit based.

    How do you encourage intelligence, something that's so highly heritable?

    Again, trying to enforce something like this – because you would end up having to enforce it – means a system like this is not merit based anymore. In the end, you have built a collectivist system, just like any other.
  7. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    No one could be left out of the system. No matter how smart the person is, they would have a wonderful quality of life compared to the current state of things.

    Look at evolution. When a skill is not useful in an envionment, it is not improved. Intellegence would need to have some benefit in order for humans as a whole to get more intellegent. More intellegence= less suffering. More intellegence= advancement for the human race. Humans have a group mentality. Whatever the group does, they do to. It doesn't matter if the thing is right or wrong. We see mindless entertainment and no incentive to learn anything besides the narrow skills needed to become workers. If instead it is promoted that people improve theirselves, they will want to do it!

    The current religions are not healthy for anyone, even if they fulfill a temporary emotional need for the individual. People will not stop their religions. Sometimes people need a rock to jump to. A religion that teaches that improving ones self until they are the best they can be, is the way to go to meet this ends.

    I honestly don't have any hope for this to come about any time soon. I only do what I do for moral reasons. I can't just turn a blind eye and let it be. Especially not at the point I've come to in my life. A merit based society is NOT possible if money influences 'what goes' in the system. The only thing that should influence laws and science is logic and reason. The only thing that should influence a person having a position is their abilities and character. I dont care what the psychopaths want. I never will care.
  8. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member Staff Member

    You would make an excellent politician... you wrote a lot without addressing most of the questions. :)

    Whose logic and whose reason?
    Daniel Delion likes this.
  9. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Because most people are not rational, this excludes their logic and reason.
  10. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Is rationality a dichotomy?
  11. Daniel Delion

    Daniel Delion Member

    I would venture to say that no systems ever revolve around money. Money might be a symbol or a device of what they revolve around, but it's replaceable, depending on the culture. It can be anything. For Amazonian headhunters, it's shrunken heads.

    "Man cannot think or reason":

    Ruryse and ListenNighGlint like this.
  12. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Yes. The world is always changed by single people and small groups that this does not apply to.

    Ruryse and ListenNighGlint like this.
  13. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member Staff Member

    And it goes unnoticed for great amount of times...
  14. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member Staff Member

    What do they revolve around then? Greed? Selfishness? Insecurity...?
    Daniel Delion likes this.
  15. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    My question was, is rationality a dichotomy? Are there only fully rational and not-at-all-rational people, and nothing in between?
  16. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    He's got some on "money", too:

    What do you think, @fschmidt ? I think Jacque Fresco was quite close to what you're saying, except without religion (unless we call The Venus Project a religion, and we might as well do).
    Daniel Delion likes this.
  17. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Not absolutely.
    Ruryse likes this.
  18. ListenNighGlint

    ListenNighGlint Active Member Staff Member

    I wouldn't hesitate calling it a religion or a... political theory? It's just funny he preached 'money is bad' then on their site DONATE THE VENUS PROJECT! :D
  19. Ruryse

    Ruryse Active Member Staff Member

    Who decides what's rational and what isn't?
  20. Hailey

    Hailey Member

    Those who hold the meritocracy views or similar views would be the rational ones to set up the government and decide the rules of rationality initially. (Assuming it ever happened)

    These people would not be the only ones considered rational in my book. There are plenty of innately rational people, but many of them are immoral, misguided or afraid of change so they would not be included in the choices related to founding and implementing the system.

    For a system like this, I can't imagine any way other than force to get it implemented.

    Once the system is in place, the most meritious and rational of all sectors of life would be voted in by their peers to make decisions.

    What is considered rational from the implementation on, will be decided by the head(s) of the department of that sector. Every part of the system will be subject to the scientific method. If a thing is shown not to work, it will be stopped or replaced.

    If the head of any department is deemed irrational or not meritious by their peers, they will be removed and replaced.

    Once the system had been in place for some time, people would evolve until humans as a whole are rational, intellegent and moral.

    EDIT: Every person who has a related job or takes a test to prove knowledge of a subject will be a 'peer' and will have a vote in who the most rational and meritious is in any given sector. They may vote in as many sectors as they want.
    Last edited: Nov 19, 2017 at 3:09 AM

Share This Page