Meritocracy: The Progeny of Democracy (let the haters hate!)

I disagree. This is still ego based. Those with true merit, those truely superior seek to elevate not judge. If you judge you better take good look at yourself because your deluding your own self mastery.

It will be a free lunch for everyone society. Because not much will be required to be done. There will be no "position of power."

Yes all humans are creators. No doubt about it. Some older and more mature than others. Sure there are levels. You cant expect a child to out perform an adult. And if your do expect that you are being unreasonable and not correctly managing our resources and you hvae no business in a position of power.

So if we disagree in who is meritorious, now what? You and i fight to the death for the position? Becuase I think some of your views are still severely misguided and ego driven.

The same type of leadership we have now.


Also you think parents merely raise whatever child is needed and if they fail its their fault. Those are the experiences of life. And if you think you have the power to control them you vastly over state yourself. Not to mention its not logical to maintain the human resource.

Many brilliant minds have been born to unfortunate circumstance. And you cannot dictate where those minds will be born. You can observe this, yet attempt to flail and control it on your own. I know plent of people that people consider "productive" and consider them stupid, and their kids stupid.

So again the "merit" is based on perception. And since i know how much impact 1 individual can have? Even though most dont, ill still manage my resources to maximize the probability of that 1 individual meeting their full potential. Regardless of who the parent is. Because again logically you can see that the parent may or may not have a bearing on who the child becomes. Regardless of how many dead weight people get free lunches. Its worth it to cutlivate the entirety of the human resource. For that 1 great potential.

You can select those who rule but you cannot select those who are born.


Sorry fellas but im not getting much wisdom from you. Got the basic notions but need to kill some ego still. IMa have to take that leadership position from you for now

Last Edited by Fatstogie on 06/19/2012 01:00 AM

This system of merit is alive in parts of Buddhist Thailand, if you have the merit to recognize it and meet the right people.

I honestly despise when I hear the word Ego because it is new age and thrown around by you all when you don't like what you read or hear. You then throw the human label Ego at the conversation with the person you are debating as if you are saying they are a pompous, self righteous, selfish lil punk and you are Ghandi or Buddha.lol

You are wrong when you say this; "It will be a free lunch for everyone society. Because not much will be required to be done."

How will it be a free lunch for everyone society? What, do you think we are going to automate things to where we just sit, eat and shit all day and this is where we earn merit?

Where you are also wrong is that there will ALWAYS be managers, judges and shepherds of the flock to help keep it in line and guide it with their shepherd dogs.

Quoting OP--

"You are one of the most level headed people I've found on GLP! +1 Karma!

I definitely agree and it seems funny that most of the people speaking out against a New World Order are the enslaved and blissfully ignorant servants of the three major Abrahamist religions. Of course you will demonize the NWO if your death cult strives to perpetuate hatred, intolerance, jealousy, hypocrisy, blame and slander. All they want to do is separate, divide and conquer and yet there are organizations and hidden hands behind the scene that want to bring about harmony, unity, social and economic equality and peace but these tinfoil hat wearing bible thumpers would refuse and resist as if it such ideals are the work of the Antichrist. It's ridiculous!"

_____________________________________


Harmony and Unity--as in "think our way or go to jail" "accept our perversions as normal, or go to jail" "speak against what we have decided is right, and go to jail"

Social and economic equality--as if all cultures are equal(they aren't) and as if everyone is going to labor the same or have equal talents (they won't and don't). Your ideas involve stealing from those who produce to get the votes of those who don't. This eventually leads to universal poverty and slavery/police-state.

Peace--at the expense of Liberty of thought and action.

And last, but not least, bible-thumpers/Antichrist--I'm sure you know which group has always been Antichrist and which for the past 200+ years has started and profited from every major war, and which is rabidly promoting your agenda. Some of their writings give a bit different reason for their actions than that which you espouse. But then I'm sure you know that.

Last Edited by MuzzleBreak on 06/19/2012 08:53 AM

So what happens when there are only 5 apples and 10 hungry people? Does spiritual master eat first and spiritual serf not eat? A meritocracy not only fails in its logic but also in its pragmatism and consequentialism.

Produce value for others (even spiritual) and they will trade you something in return. This, producing value, is the backbone of society.

If there are 5 apples for 10 people, 5 people did NOT do their part in cooperating in the collective which will be documented. Hence, the 5 who did not do their part will not eat an apple. Their hunger will hope to serve them as a lesson to next time do their part and if they do not, eventually they will starve to death just like any animal would in the wild. Hence, it is fair and balanced system that will let nature take care of itself as if there were no shepherds or managers of the flock.

I have no problem letting someone die who refuses to live, share and cooperate in the great work. The reason being is that this is a form of Karma that we humans should not interrupt by artificially keeping someone alive who was meant to die or suffer in this life by their own karmic choices.

Last Edited by Gnostic Warrior on 06/19/2012 09:41 AM

Do you live in the U.S. or North Korea?

Are you religious? Muslim? Christian? jewish? Because what you just said is much akin to the pot calling the kettle black..if you are.

You never cease to amaze me!

lol, why, because I speak the truth? My point is that it is not natural to artificially keep people who should not be naturally alive by feeding them and keeping them alive. I AM not saying that we pull out all the feeding tubes of helpless babies or injured people who cannot eat because of an accident, illness or disease. But if a system that is truly Meritocracy MUST address who eats, who does not, who lives and who dies or else it is a ENTITLEMENTOCRACY where everyone is kept alive, gets to procreate, eat etc regardless of their input.

Last Edited by Gnostic Warrior on 06/19/2012 02:34 PM

Thus your laws will inevitably cause crime. Cool. Count me out

First of all, you obviously are familiar with Plato so I respect everything you have to say.

I am not claiming to perfectly know Plato, but I'm sure I have a firm enough grasp that my interpretations are not GRAVE misunderstandings. I think you misunderstand me more than I misunderstand Plato. That is fine. I wrote a tiny little blurb on it, I haven't laid out an entire theory, so this is bound to happen. And it is good you bring it up so we can clarify.

I am not suggesting that meritocracy is the ultimate pure form of government that will not degenerate. Think about where/when Socrates introduces this idea: IMMEDIATELY AFTER THE CITY HAS BECOME FEVERISH. Meritocracy is the mechanism that moves Democracy to it's next stage, nothing more. At this point it is actually more about the GUARDIANS, the silver class. We have not reached the rule of the philosopher yet. So we disagree, but I think we actually agree more now that I have made myself clear (i think) on this point.

"So if you believe that Meritocracy is what Plato is advocating than you believe that he is advocating the banning of his own book. " ... I am not making that argument, therefore I don't think that either... However I'm not sure you are correct about that anyway. I THINK that censorship is not always like book burning. It means that there must be a process of education in the dissemination of the work. My example would be Homer. The Republic is full of criticisms of Homer, but it is quite obvious that both Socrates and Plato had an immense respect for Homer as well. I think the concern in censorship is that people take Homer too literally and there needs to be explanation in order to prevent that.


I think what Plato has lain out for us is the ULTIMATE evolution of government. Cycles may be involved, but once the perfect form of gov't is realized, as perfect, it will not degenerate. Notice that Socrates readily admits to Glaucon that the city of necessity will lead to the feverish city. While this is a degeneration in terms of necessity, it is progress. The feverish city is a natural phase, I would compare it to adolescence. (Worth mentioning the Hopi myth that 2012 is when the world completes its adolescence). Meritocracy then would be early adulthood.

I don't agree that Plato is saying that NOTHING but Tyranny can come from Democracy. I think the point is that Tyranny did in fact come out of Athenian Democracy for the reasons stated in the book. I think the argument about Democracy in the Republic is that it is the HIGHEST STAKES form of government. Most easily to degenerate, but also contains the best chance of leading to something better. You say that there are 5 gov'ts enumerated, but in a way there are 10, bc there is a good and bad version of each. The communion of saints is the only form without a bad form. I do love that you brought up that this form is not worldly, I totally agree. I think the point is that much like the kingdom of heaven, it is here all the time and we have only to acknowledge it.


Remember that the examination of justice in the State is a macrocosm of biological health in an individual organism. In Democracy the appetite (commerce) is in charge, and while initially it is good because it enables growth, it degenerates because commerce is making decisions outside of its scope of expertise. Over-consumption leads to bad health. Meritocracy then is not a 'horseshit society' but a sign of the State regaining health as it will be do a better job of assigning people to jobs according to their talents COMPARED TO DEMOCRACY. It is progress, but it is only a step. To your point it is much like finding a good diet, you are setting guidelines on how to eat and exercise. As you get healthier you see that physical health is only part of a healthy soul, and when you are more physically healthy, you are able to make better decisions on how to help foster a healthy soul than when you are physically sick. Make sense? I feel I'm not giving the best explanation possible, but I think I'm getting the point across.

So I'm thinking that in the Republic, among other things, Plato/Socrates is offering a choice on where to take Democracy. The book was written after the choice had been historically made already. We are currently in the midst of our choice. The difference between whether a government degenerates or generates/evolves, has to do with identity. If we identify ourselves as individuals, yes Democracy will inevitably lead to Tyranny (tyranny of the ego on the individual level). If we raise our identity to higher collectives (politically our identity should be humanity, environmentally it should be Earth itself, and ultimately either the universe (creation) or perhaps even past that, the One - creation and creator as One) then government evolves rather than degenerates.

There is more to say on the issue but I have to go for now! Cheers!!!