5 ms·

Not exactly true, back in feudal times just being able to read was quite a privilege. They also had a lock on information. We're much more on equal footing in

Not exactly true, back in feudal times just being able to read was quite a privilege. They also had a lock on information. We're much more on equal footing in terms of ability to gain information. Whether we act on the information is another issue.

daveloyall 11y ago
Are you kidding? What does a family line which has had uninterrupted, exclusive access to a personal library know? I mean think about it--what is that family like? That family which has held on to the same chunk of physical space, with books and notebooks, for several generations. "Equal footing in terms of ability to gain information", my ass! My own toddler gets confused when he tries to describe his home--probably because he's moved three times in as many years. I remember the encyclopedias I read as a child. But, I don't have them. I can't review them. I can't consult my notes, nor smell them and get connected to the concrete memory of the day I learned about phases of matter or dry cell batteries. Those things are important. They change the slope of the playing field.
- withdavidli 11y ago
  i don't understand the argument you are trying to make. you cut off the the "more" to make it sound like my statement meant we are equal instead of relatively better than we once were in comparison to the upper class. then proceeded to provide examples of your toddler being able to retain information and yourself retaining information. both are about memory and ability to recall those memories with accuracy.
  - daveloyall 11y ago
    I had to go looking for that 'more'. I guess I cut it off (didn't notice it to begin with) because it's a meaningless modifier when attached to an absolute-sounding phrase like "equal footing". I don't know the name of this writing style pitfall, but here is another example: "The boot hardly annihilated the flower." ...That's a terrible example? Oh, in the first post, my examples are about "ability to gain information [learn]" but you were talking about "ability to gain information [access]". Okay, yes the internet and the public library system are truly wonderful. I do presume that the ruling class (and/or the rich) have some information that is not publicly available, and it's probably very important information, but yes, a poor man can walk into a library today and find treasure laying around. That has improved our footing. :)
danieltillett 11y ago
In order to have an effective meritocracy you have to have universal education. You then pick the top 0.1% and invite them to join you and marry your son or daughter. The whole economic system is designed to identify the very clever no matter their background and bring them into the ruling class.
- khuey 11y ago
  If you banish any of the smart/clever/etc to the underclass they might just start a revolution. Much easier to invite them to join the party.
  - danieltillett 11y ago
    Exactly right. The rich found this out early last century with the rise of communism. What they did was very clever; they basically introduced socialism in the 1930s by shifting the majority share of production to the masses to keep them quiet, introduced mass higher education with an emphasis on identifying the very smart (troublemakers if excluded) and brought them into the ruling class. Once this "decapitation of the masses” was in place (1970) they slowly took back their share of production. We are now back to the level the rich had in the 19th C. Impressive if somewhat depressing.
    - MaysonL 11y ago
      Democracy is the insurance premium the rich pay against the threat of pitchforks and guillotines.
      - danieltillett 11y ago
        Democracy only works if you have leaders. The non-rich no longer have leaders. We do at least have better bread and circus than the past.
- cinquemb 11y ago
  If we build upon your assertion ("to have an effective meritocracy you have to have universal education"), if some of those in power define universal education differently (which would seem to make any concept of universality in education void of such in practice), then it wouldn't be surprising to see a decline in the effectiveness of an economic system, which is what I would suggest is what we are seeing today.

daveloyall 11y ago

Are you kidding? What does a family line which has had uninterrupted, exclusive access to a personal library know? I mean think about it--what is that family like? That family which has held on to the same chunk of physical space, with books and notebooks, for several generations. "Equal footing in terms of ability to gain information", my ass! My own toddler gets confused when he tries to describe his home--probably because he's moved three times in as many years. I remember the encyclopedias I read as a child. But, I don't have them. I can't review them. I can't consult my notes, nor smell them and get connected to the concrete memory of the day I learned about phases of matter or dry cell batteries. Those things are important. They change the slope of the playing field.

withdavidli 11y ago
i don't understand the argument you are trying to make. you cut off the the "more" to make it sound like my statement meant we are equal instead of relatively better than we once were in comparison to the upper class. then proceeded to provide examples of your toddler being able to retain information and yourself retaining information. both are about memory and ability to recall those memories with accuracy.
- daveloyall 11y ago
  I had to go looking for that 'more'. I guess I cut it off (didn't notice it to begin with) because it's a meaningless modifier when attached to an absolute-sounding phrase like "equal footing". I don't know the name of this writing style pitfall, but here is another example: "The boot hardly annihilated the flower." ...That's a terrible example? Oh, in the first post, my examples are about "ability to gain information [learn]" but you were talking about "ability to gain information [access]". Okay, yes the internet and the public library system are truly wonderful. I do presume that the ruling class (and/or the rich) have some information that is not publicly available, and it's probably very important information, but yes, a poor man can walk into a library today and find treasure laying around. That has improved our footing. :)

danieltillett 11y ago

In order to have an effective meritocracy you have to have universal education. You then pick the top 0.1% and invite them to join you and marry your son or daughter. The whole economic system is designed to identify the very clever no matter their background and bring them into the ruling class.

khuey 11y ago
If you banish any of the smart/clever/etc to the underclass they might just start a revolution. Much easier to invite them to join the party.
- danieltillett 11y ago
  Exactly right. The rich found this out early last century with the rise of communism. What they did was very clever; they basically introduced socialism in the 1930s by shifting the majority share of production to the masses to keep them quiet, introduced mass higher education with an emphasis on identifying the very smart (troublemakers if excluded) and brought them into the ruling class. Once this "decapitation of the masses” was in place (1970) they slowly took back their share of production. We are now back to the level the rich had in the 19th C. Impressive if somewhat depressing.
  - MaysonL 11y ago
    Democracy is the insurance premium the rich pay against the threat of pitchforks and guillotines.
    - danieltillett 11y ago
      Democracy only works if you have leaders. The non-rich no longer have leaders. We do at least have better bread and circus than the past.
cinquemb 11y ago
If we build upon your assertion ("to have an effective meritocracy you have to have universal education"), if some of those in power define universal education differently (which would seem to make any concept of universality in education void of such in practice), then it wouldn't be surprising to see a decline in the effectiveness of an economic system, which is what I would suggest is what we are seeing today.