Meritocracy vs. Democracy (1 Viewer)

[moll.]

But a government voted in by the people you describe would essentially just enfranchise a bunch of ivory tower academics and boofhead footballers, both of whom are going to rentseek hard.

And the people who choose to complete the community service, as well as the emergency services personnel.

 

[moll.]

Ok I think he's trolling.

Either that, or he's a complete mongoloid.

lol.

 

[whatashotbyseve]

If it's not broke, don't fix it.

Whether our current system is broken or not is open to interpretation. Meritocracy has merit, but is just too controversial to implement. Let the plebs have their basic rights.

 

[moll.]

Duh. Of course it's never going to be implemented. No harm in discussing the pros and cons though, aye?

 

[whatashotbyseve]

Of course. It sounds quite utopian. We might actually be respected on the world stage. Reverse the brain drain, etc.

 

[Iron]

I'm not sure how I really feel about a meritocracy. I mean, what could be more meritous than growing up in the King's palace, as his sole heir and having a rigerous education of the highest standard alongside constant observance of the inner-most workings of power? Of lessons in how to hold power? They would draw on a long family and institutional experience to be in a more sober and rational position to judge which traditions are best for the country, and why.
Surely this is more than the equivalent of some poor, but slightly more clever, sod who spends most of his life fighting to get out of the mud, seizes power and has to learn on the job how to use it.
As long as moral values are instilled upon the Prince, in order to check excessive self-indulgence, corruption etc, then I see the constitutional monarchy as best

Furthermore, when you take clasping ambition out of the picture, a great peace is bestowed upon the public, who learn to accept that the peak of greatness is out of the question for them. They therefore throw themselves genuinely into whatever line of work they do. In turn, they have monarchies of their own; families who dedicate themselves to their profession; son takes over from father and splendid human craftship, genuine skill is reborn.

 

[withoutaface]

And the people who choose to complete the community service, as well as the emergency services personnel.

How about those who are hard at work inventing shit to make sure we can all have drinking water in 20 years time? There are over 9000 other jobs which are just as important as emergency services, and you're forgetting that most cops are cunts and most firies are filthy unionists.

 

[dieburndie]

What would be the great benefit of implementing the model you've described?
What makes it worth removing the voting rights of most of the population?

Seems rather pointless to me, I don't see how firefighting, military service or being good at sports makes someone a worthwhile voter.

 

[Silver Persian]

Well how about:

Before every citizen votes, they must do a test that determines how well they understand the policies and political philosophies of the different parties. People who get a high score on the test get many voting "points", and those who do less well get only a few voting points.

How do ya like this batshit insane idea BOS?

 

[Iron]

I think that it would be better that a screen be established at each polling place, see.
When voters walk through, science will determine their IQ and this will be cross-referenced with information about their incomem marital status, health records etc instantly compiled through their chip/national card.
Everyone votes like normal, see, but what they dont know is that we only count the good ones.

This is done with the upmost secrecy, see

 

[withoutaface]

Well how about:

Before every citizen votes, they must do a test that determines how well they understand the policies and political philosophies of the different parties. People who get a high score on the test get many voting "points", and those who do less well get only a few voting points.

How do ya like this batshit insane idea BOS?

Makes more sense than what moll's pushing.

 

[Tonthat]

How about something like a rep system?
The more rep you have the more points a politician gets if you approve of them.

How's that for another dumbshit idea?

 

[Enteebee]

The basis of the system is that you have to either show a willingness for self-sacrifice or to work exceptionally hard for the right to vote, as it is something to be earned, not given out freely.

Hi plato,

The thing is that if such things are what the community values, then these people will have more sway in the political system (if they so choose). I don't think we should dictate what a society should value, cause for instance I don't think sporting heros should have any more say than a 'hero' who works a 9-5 job to feed their family, in fact i'd argue many of these people owe society far more than society owes them... but anyway.

I also think that any time you put in place some sort of a system whereby you're saying X is meritorious etc you're making for corruption, as well as a lot of discontent amongst the public. The main problem I think our current system has as far as fairness in regard to political representation is merely that those born into wealth will for no reason but birthright be granted greater powers.

Join the Mobile Infantry and save the Galaxy. Service guarantees citizenship.

Based on the republic

ALSO! In throwing out crazy ideas, i say we have text in voting like Australian Idol.

 

[Iron]

Plato was a fascist!

 

[S.H.O.D.A.N.]

Was watching Boston Legal tonight and Alan mentioned in his closing argument that America (and Australia) are democracies, not meritocracies. It got me thinking: Is that really such a good thing?

Yes. What do you suggest, communism? A Brave New World? Don't make me laugh.

Personally I think no. As an arrogant and conceited intellectual elitist I have a few very subtle reasons why, but primary amongst these is the current societal trend - which I frequently bear witness to - of the media, politicians, teachers and anyone else in an educative position having to dumb-down their speech and ideas to get them across.

Don't kid yourself. There is no "current societal trend" here. Humans have been acting like this since the dawn of time (or at least speech). If anything we've been getting smarter as time goes on. Thank you, renaissance, industrial revolution, and information age.

If this were to change to a society in which intelligence, skill or both are most highly valued above all else, would it not be a better place? I say yes.

Only if it were still a democracy. Honestly what makes you think the only way to promote appreciation of intelligence and merit is outside of democracy?

 

[Graney]

I don't see how athlete's are more meritous than any wage slave. It's largely genetic advantage.

 

[Kwayera]

While the idea of the intellectual elite as the "ruling class" of a society is tempting, it goes against everything that we treasure in the fact that the right to vote is inviolate for any citizen living in your society. While I do disagree with the age limits (haha another Boston Legal episode) as arbitrary and inappropriate, the idea that not every citizen has that right to vote based purely on merit is disturbing, at best.

 

[Iron]

Hey guys, i think she's trying to say something!

 

[Kwayera]

Oh shush, you

 

[Iron]

bah youre no fun
one day i will break your iron-proof fence and the lols will be epic

meanwhile, /bounce