3 ms·

Meritocracy is just a bare-bones version of a "founding myth" that a society adopts when enough people reject the traditional narrative. The problem is that it

Meritocracy is just a bare-bones version of a "founding myth" that a society adopts when enough people reject the traditional narrative. The problem is that it is so absolutist that it is easy to find holes and internal inconsistencies in its story. Hence it can scarcely perform its function--namely, to provide a narrative that establishes the legitimacy of the ruling class--for very long. Look only at the examples given in the article. >The most effective way to rile the meritocrats is to attack their faith in expertise: Lord Turnbull, a former Cabinet secretary, has said that Brexiteers’ willingness to question current Treasury forecasts of the impact of Brexit was reminiscent of pre-war Nazi Germany. Of course there is nothing wrongheaded about contesting the findings of government economic forecasts--governments produce such forecasts out of necessity, not because they exemplify any paragon of scientific truth. Reasonable people often disagree about them. >The easiest way to rile the populists is to imply that their attachment to symbols of national identity, such as blue passports or the Cross of St George, is a sign of low intelligence. This is so absurd it barely needs any mention. Nation-states have existed for a long time, and preference for their symbols has nothing to do with intelligence or lack thereof. So you have a dissident group making a claim about a point of fact, and the soi-disant intellectually superior group responding with an ad hominem that slurs vasts swaths of the population. This is not a sustainable situation.

tonyedgecombe 9y ago
Of course there is nothing wrongheaded about contesting the findings of government economic forecasts--governments produce such forecasts out of necessity, not because they exemplify any paragon of scientific truth. Reasonable people often disagree about them. It's an interesting situation in the UK because the civil service which created those forecasts cannot respond to the criticism, they are not allowed to under their remit. Normally politicians would defend this work but what government politician would defend something so bleak, no matter how accurate it may or may not be.

tonyedgecombe 9y ago

Of course there is nothing wrongheaded about contesting the findings of government economic forecasts--governments produce such forecasts out of necessity, not because they exemplify any paragon of scientific truth. Reasonable people often disagree about them. It's an interesting situation in the UK because the civil service which created those forecasts cannot respond to the criticism, they are not allowed to under their remit. Normally politicians would defend this work but what government politician would defend something so bleak, no matter how accurate it may or may not be.