Having a meritocratic structure doesn't even inherently mean individualist. It could be measured at the team or project level. It also doesn't have to be (and t

Having a meritocratic structure doesn't even inherently mean individualist. It could be measured at the team or project level. It also doesn't have to be (and typically isn't) exactly the measurable contributions ("load-bearing capacity") to the goal itself that determines the best "engineer." More often your "best" engineer is the one who is easy to work with, embraces tough challenges, and can adapt well to changes. Yeah I totally agree with that. To me, that shows that the measure of merit is, #1: extremely subjective and #2: influenced by all kinds of factors that would not traditionally be associated with merit. Basically, I think that it often makes sense to do affirmative action within a true meritocratic framework, but that the term meritocracy is generally used to juxtapose against affirmative action. If the term is being used to argue against its true meaning, then it's not a useful term and should be retired.