3 ms·

While I agree that we fall well short of the utopian ideal (rather than the farcical interpretation) there are plenty of other bureaucratic barriers to meritocr

While I agree that we fall well short of the utopian ideal (rather than the farcical interpretation) there are plenty of other bureaucratic barriers to meritocracies as well. In my experience even the most dedicated, agile people hit organizational limits on complexity or continuity and ultimately have to settle for sub-par network topologies, software stacks, and yes even coworkers. To the extent that we all understand a meritocracy to refer to a system where things are evaluated on their merits, hopefully all agree that it is a fine ideal even if the historical meaning (like 'begging the question') is different.

ktizo 14y ago
As far as I am aware, meritocracy in the original definition is one which is ruled by people on the basis of their paper qualifications, which leads them to fundamentally believe that they are justified in holding power over others, despite the fact that those qualifications are often a consequence of a lot more than just ability. Part of the warning was that meritocracies can become both tautological and blind to corruption as the bits of paper become the main measure of the right to hold power.