12 ms·

I personally long for a word that conveys a person’s ability to demonstrate competence and expertise and commitment separate from We have a word for that: "mer

I personally long for a word that conveys a person’s ability to demonstrate competence and expertise and commitment separate from We have a word for that: "meritocracy". The fact that we may have failed to achieve this fully doesn't mean we should throw out the word. By the Mozilla logic, we should also throw out "democracy" because our government(s) have failed to include all stakeholders; throw out "feminism" because a few of them have demonstrated that they're anti-male rather than pro-female; "education" because we've so badly failed to properly educate our youth (and adults!). Really, pretty much everything we've set as a goal for ourselves, we've failed to achieve in its entirety: such is the nature of goals. But those lapses are just further goals for us to cover. Throwing up our hands and changing the goal posts, or at least how we reference the goal posts, isn't going to get us any closer to them, and seems more likely to confuse the issue, taking us at least somewhat farther away.

notacoward 8y ago
The OP specifically addresses that issue. "Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and need to be set aside" ...and... "Sadly, “meritocracy” is not that word. Maybe it once was, or could have been. But not today." Like it or not, words have more than etymological meaning. They also have historical and cultural meaning, that might be sharply at odds with their etymology, and that precludes their use even in situations where they're technically accurate. "Meritocracy" has become such a word. Like "traditional American values" and "celebration of European culture" as synonyms for racism, "meritocracy" has become a rallying cry for opposition to diversity, inclusion, and egalitarianism. All as the person who originally coined the word meant it, BTW. We can coin new words that are just as etymologically valid without the cultural baggage.
- CWuestefeld 8y ago
  Well, the OP mentions it. But you haven't actually provided any rebuttal to my analogy with terminology for other missed goals. I think they're pretty good examples of words that are "historically tarnished" in similar ways.
- raxxorrax 8y ago
  > Like "traditional American values" and "celebration of European culture" Or diversity and inclusiveness.
- cheeseomlit 8y ago
  We're not allowed to talk about celebrating European culture anymore?
  - danharaj 8y ago
    What the hell is European culture? German culture, Italian culture, Romanian culture, sure. But...?
    - cheeseomlit 8y ago
      You just said what it is? I mean, what is Hispanic culture if not Mexican/Spanish/Venezuelan/etc., what the hell is Asian culture if not Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc.
      - danharaj 8y ago
        I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "celebrate Asian culture". Precisely because it's a barely meaningful agglomeration. Now if we examine the context in which "European culture" is celebrated... hm, yes I see.
        true_religion 8y ago
        I have heard it. There are just generic Asian American society functions, which celebrate the melting pot of everyone who isn't strictly first generation and has multiple ethnic backgrounds.
        AstralStorm 8y ago
        That would be Asian American culture then, except Americans tend to not notice that their culture is not everywhere and needs qualification.
        hjrnunes 8y ago
        http://portlandobserver.com/news/2018/apr/25/celebrate-asian-culture/ http://portlandobserver.com/news/2018/apr/25/celebrate-asian...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- cirgue 8y ago
  > "Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and need to be set aside" Every word, every ideal, and every good intention becomes tarnished by history. Humanity is not a perfect phenomenon: it is deeply imperfect. There is no way to have progress if our moral view of the world is purely associative.
- furgooswft13 8y ago
  "Meritocracy" is only tarnished by the very same people writing blogs like this. Don't be surprised if you spend years trashing a house then suddenly realize you don't want to live there anymore. Plenty of people will continue to use the word and try to live up to it's concept because they did not buy the FUD heaped on it (by the very people who now conveniently want to abandon it) in the first place.
- pgeorgi 8y ago
  Step 1: Point out how horrible "meritocracy" is Step 2: Bemoan that you need a new word for what meritocracy used to mean Step 3: ??? (my guess is: rinse and repeat)
java_script 8y ago
No it’s more akin to black lives matter not allowing themselves to say “all lives matter”. Fine in a vacuum, but the phrase has become loaded by the opposition, which Mozilla mentions in TFA.
- leereeves 8y ago
  "All lives matter" was never fine with BLM. Their objection to the phrase began before any Republican uttered it, when they booed a Democratic Presidential candidate for saying it and forced him to apologize.
protomyth 8y ago
It happens a lot actually. The word "empower" has done so many circuits on this track that I don't know if it is good or bad this year. It was once (90's, but probably still) good grant writing practice to know what the "in" words were at a department or agency. The word churn was a real item. "Socialize" was another word that went through some gyrations. Frankly, I looked at this aspect of word smithing as a sort of shibboleth to identify the accepted crowd. Meritocracy as a normal read of its definition should be a fine word, but Silicon Valley seems to be going through the same word smithing that DC goes through. New beliefs, new words, and must demonize the old words.
roenxi 8y ago
There is another point in a very similar vein - maybe a decade ago, Firefox was one of the jewels of open source. An example of how a group of volunteers could come together and assemble great software without hiding the source code and going for a quick buck. Whatever Mozilla sees themselves as today, this language is clearly different from that original vision. Meritocracy is closely aligned to technical outcomes in a way that diversity and inclusiveness are not. What I mean is, if your meritocracy fails to produce good software, obviously it is broken. If your ... inclusivocracy? ... fails to produce good software then it doesn't mean anything. Obviously this language doesn't preclude the technical, but the focus has clearly shifted in the intervening years.
frobozz 8y ago
Meritocracy, when the term was coined, referred to a society that was essentially a reboot of aristocracy. A new group takes charge by their own merit, then they embed their own descendants in the leader caste through a combination of shaping society to their own definition of merit, and designing an education system to confer "merit" on their own offspring at the expense of less "merit-worthy" children (i.e. most children who do not have meritorious ancestors). A meritocratic society also suffers from an additional problem over that of an aristocracy because it embeds the complementary statement - that those who are not well rewarded are in that position because they are not as good/hard-working/clever as their "betters".
- JoeAltmaier 8y ago
  I get it; meritocracy often breaks down over time. But then it's become something else (perhaps a new aristocracy). But its not a different word for the same thing.
  - frobozz 8y ago
    The problem in my last paragraph exists from the beginning. I would not be surprised if one of the reasons that the gap between C-level and worker salaries has widened so much, is due to the adoption of the term "meritocratic". On a smaller scale, the aristocracy problem exists from very early on in the forms of "hiring in ones own image" and placing certain roles in higher regard (with higher reward or more opportunity for career progression) than others (e.g. sales > developers > UX > QA) even if they make equal contributions. It is very difficult to evaluate merit across different professions (e.g is Tom Cruise a better actor than Lionel Messi is a footballer? Does a lawyer contribute more to society than teacher?) However, once you start claiming that you have a meritocracy, you are also claiming that those who receive the most reward have the most merit. i.e. in the example above, that your sales people are more hard-working and clever than your developers, who are in turn more hard-working and clever than your UX people etc.
- true_religion 8y ago
  Aristocracies also have that statement. Usually the aristocrats are there because of divine decree showing their merit, and the underclass are similarly slotted into that position due to their bloodlines. Unlike meritocracy though, there is no way out of the situation beyond tearing down the system.
java_script 8y ago
Your soapbox speech against the entire idea of changing connotations is bewildering to me. We change and abandon words all of the time. What you're saying is in line with "Why should I let some jerk from history ruin the name 'Adolph' for me. I'm gonna name my son that anyway!" Words are for other people and other people might have opinions about them. Why are you so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that? also your examples are bad. You picked non-controversial ones that aren't currently cultural wedge issues or dog-whistles. Try ones like "pro-life" or "liberal" instead.
- pgeorgi 8y ago
  > We change and abandon words all of the time. Why are you so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that? The genesis story of meritocracy as told by its enemies is that it was used satirically (eg. Wikipedia: "It was used pejoratively by British politician and sociologist Michael Young in his 1958 satirical essay The Rise of the Meritocracy"). Why are they so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that "meritocracy" in the context of open source development doesn't carry that demeaning connotation, because people changed the word's meaning within their subculture sometimes in the 1980's? We change and abandon words all of the time.
  - java_script 8y ago
    ...I can’t answer that because I’m not one those people saying that. Also answering a question with a question is an evasion technique. Just say what you believe, and don’t drill me on stuff other people said.
    - pgeorgi 8y ago
      I believe your "question" is loaded, misleading and missing the point: It's not the OSS folks complaining about a change in meaning, but those who wish to retire meritocracy because they're too inflexible to accept that other people make a word mean something else.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
prepend 8y ago
We need a word that conveys “yes, there are systemic problems that are unaddressed in use of this word, and I did not include it in the document using this word, please direct all conversation unrelated to the topic at hand off thread.” And then we can use it instead of meritocracy*. Inventing a new word will have the same problem and likely be worse due to the confusion around using a word with the same meaning except it’s not bad.

notacoward 8y ago

The OP specifically addresses that issue. "Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and need to be set aside" ...and... "Sadly, “meritocracy” is not that word. Maybe it once was, or could have been. But not today." Like it or not, words have more than etymological meaning. They also have historical and cultural meaning, that might be sharply at odds with their etymology, and that precludes their use even in situations where they're technically accurate. "Meritocracy" has become such a word. Like "traditional American values" and "celebration of European culture" as synonyms for racism, "meritocracy" has become a rallying cry for opposition to diversity, inclusion, and egalitarianism. All as the person who originally coined the word meant it, BTW. We can coin new words that are just as etymologically valid without the cultural baggage.

CWuestefeld 8y ago
Well, the OP mentions it. But you haven't actually provided any rebuttal to my analogy with terminology for other missed goals. I think they're pretty good examples of words that are "historically tarnished" in similar ways.
raxxorrax 8y ago
> Like "traditional American values" and "celebration of European culture" Or diversity and inclusiveness.
cheeseomlit 8y ago
We're not allowed to talk about celebrating European culture anymore?
- danharaj 8y ago
  What the hell is European culture? German culture, Italian culture, Romanian culture, sure. But...?
  - cheeseomlit 8y ago
    You just said what it is? I mean, what is Hispanic culture if not Mexican/Spanish/Venezuelan/etc., what the hell is Asian culture if not Chinese/Japanese/Korean/etc.
    - danharaj 8y ago
      I don't think I've ever heard anyone say "celebrate Asian culture". Precisely because it's a barely meaningful agglomeration. Now if we examine the context in which "European culture" is celebrated... hm, yes I see.
      - true_religion 8y ago
        I have heard it. There are just generic Asian American society functions, which celebrate the melting pot of everyone who isn't strictly first generation and has multiple ethnic backgrounds.
        AstralStorm 8y ago
        That would be Asian American culture then, except Americans tend to not notice that their culture is not everywhere and needs qualification.
      - hjrnunes 8y ago
        http://portlandobserver.com/news/2018/apr/25/celebrate-asian-culture/ http://portlandobserver.com/news/2018/apr/25/celebrate-asian...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
cirgue 8y ago
> "Sometimes good words and good aspirations get tarnished with history, and need to be set aside" Every word, every ideal, and every good intention becomes tarnished by history. Humanity is not a perfect phenomenon: it is deeply imperfect. There is no way to have progress if our moral view of the world is purely associative.
furgooswft13 8y ago
"Meritocracy" is only tarnished by the very same people writing blogs like this. Don't be surprised if you spend years trashing a house then suddenly realize you don't want to live there anymore. Plenty of people will continue to use the word and try to live up to it's concept because they did not buy the FUD heaped on it (by the very people who now conveniently want to abandon it) in the first place.
pgeorgi 8y ago
Step 1: Point out how horrible "meritocracy" is Step 2: Bemoan that you need a new word for what meritocracy used to mean Step 3: ??? (my guess is: rinse and repeat)

java_script 8y ago

No it’s more akin to black lives matter not allowing themselves to say “all lives matter”. Fine in a vacuum, but the phrase has become loaded by the opposition, which Mozilla mentions in TFA.

leereeves 8y ago
"All lives matter" was never fine with BLM. Their objection to the phrase began before any Republican uttered it, when they booed a Democratic Presidential candidate for saying it and forced him to apologize.

protomyth 8y ago

It happens a lot actually. The word "empower" has done so many circuits on this track that I don't know if it is good or bad this year. It was once (90's, but probably still) good grant writing practice to know what the "in" words were at a department or agency. The word churn was a real item. "Socialize" was another word that went through some gyrations. Frankly, I looked at this aspect of word smithing as a sort of shibboleth to identify the accepted crowd. Meritocracy as a normal read of its definition should be a fine word, but Silicon Valley seems to be going through the same word smithing that DC goes through. New beliefs, new words, and must demonize the old words.

roenxi 8y ago

There is another point in a very similar vein - maybe a decade ago, Firefox was one of the jewels of open source. An example of how a group of volunteers could come together and assemble great software without hiding the source code and going for a quick buck. Whatever Mozilla sees themselves as today, this language is clearly different from that original vision. Meritocracy is closely aligned to technical outcomes in a way that diversity and inclusiveness are not. What I mean is, if your meritocracy fails to produce good software, obviously it is broken. If your ... inclusivocracy? ... fails to produce good software then it doesn't mean anything. Obviously this language doesn't preclude the technical, but the focus has clearly shifted in the intervening years.

frobozz 8y ago

Meritocracy, when the term was coined, referred to a society that was essentially a reboot of aristocracy. A new group takes charge by their own merit, then they embed their own descendants in the leader caste through a combination of shaping society to their own definition of merit, and designing an education system to confer "merit" on their own offspring at the expense of less "merit-worthy" children (i.e. most children who do not have meritorious ancestors). A meritocratic society also suffers from an additional problem over that of an aristocracy because it embeds the complementary statement - that those who are not well rewarded are in that position because they are not as good/hard-working/clever as their "betters".

JoeAltmaier 8y ago
I get it; meritocracy often breaks down over time. But then it's become something else (perhaps a new aristocracy). But its not a different word for the same thing.
- frobozz 8y ago
  The problem in my last paragraph exists from the beginning. I would not be surprised if one of the reasons that the gap between C-level and worker salaries has widened so much, is due to the adoption of the term "meritocratic". On a smaller scale, the aristocracy problem exists from very early on in the forms of "hiring in ones own image" and placing certain roles in higher regard (with higher reward or more opportunity for career progression) than others (e.g. sales > developers > UX > QA) even if they make equal contributions. It is very difficult to evaluate merit across different professions (e.g is Tom Cruise a better actor than Lionel Messi is a footballer? Does a lawyer contribute more to society than teacher?) However, once you start claiming that you have a meritocracy, you are also claiming that those who receive the most reward have the most merit. i.e. in the example above, that your sales people are more hard-working and clever than your developers, who are in turn more hard-working and clever than your UX people etc.
true_religion 8y ago
Aristocracies also have that statement. Usually the aristocrats are there because of divine decree showing their merit, and the underclass are similarly slotted into that position due to their bloodlines. Unlike meritocracy though, there is no way out of the situation beyond tearing down the system.

java_script 8y ago

Your soapbox speech against the entire idea of changing connotations is bewildering to me. We change and abandon words all of the time. What you're saying is in line with "Why should I let some jerk from history ruin the name 'Adolph' for me. I'm gonna name my son that anyway!" Words are for other people and other people might have opinions about them. Why are you so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that? also your examples are bad. You picked non-controversial ones that aren't currently cultural wedge issues or dog-whistles. Try ones like "pro-life" or "liberal" instead.

pgeorgi 8y ago
> We change and abandon words all of the time. Why are you so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that? The genesis story of meritocracy as told by its enemies is that it was used satirically (eg. Wikipedia: "It was used pejoratively by British politician and sociologist Michael Young in his 1958 satirical essay The Rise of the Meritocracy"). Why are they so invested in putting up blinders to ignore that "meritocracy" in the context of open source development doesn't carry that demeaning connotation, because people changed the word's meaning within their subculture sometimes in the 1980's? We change and abandon words all of the time.
- java_script 8y ago
  ...I can’t answer that because I’m not one those people saying that. Also answering a question with a question is an evasion technique. Just say what you believe, and don’t drill me on stuff other people said.
  - pgeorgi 8y ago
    I believe your "question" is loaded, misleading and missing the point: It's not the OSS folks complaining about a change in meaning, but those who wish to retire meritocracy because they're too inflexible to accept that other people make a word mean something else.
- dragonwriter 8y ago

prepend 8y ago

We need a word that conveys “yes, there are systemic problems that are unaddressed in use of this word, and I did not include it in the document using this word, please direct all conversation unrelated to the topic at hand off thread.” And then we can use it instead of meritocracy*. Inventing a new word will have the same problem and likely be worse due to the confusion around using a word with the same meaning except it’s not bad.