Most of that doesn't translate well to open source projects, so I'd guess that "meritocracy" in open source means something else than "meritocracy" in a stratif

Most of that doesn't translate well to open source projects, so I'd guess that "meritocracy" in open source means something else than "meritocracy" in a stratified British society of 1958. For example, that the _code_ has to have merit (OSS), not the people (new aristocracy). There's something to be said about _paid_ open source software development though: once money is involved the meritocracy that can work with OSS clashes with the demands of those who pay or are paid - and therefore want the paid-for work landed no matter its technical merit, since that brings along the business or one's own promotion. I'd wager the guess that the politics aren't very different from any other corporate politics, but potentially more visible due to the projects' structure. With that in mind, I blame the disconnect about meritocracy in paid Open Source on the "paid-for" part, not on "Open Source bros fighting to exclude those who are not Like Them". A survey of projects with no monetary interests (no sponsors, no donations to pay devs, not even companies using the code) to see if they have similar issues could test that hypothesis. (disclosure: I'm paid to do open source development)