Meritocracy

[Martin Hash]

Similar to the “group vs. individual” debate that can completely color the ideology of a society, so can whether it focuses on its most competent individuals vs. its least capable members. As an engineer, it seems obvious to me that aligning a society behind its most competent individuals – a meritocracy – would be ideally effective and practical, but this simple straightforward outlook on life is very controversial. There are many people who believe that a society is best defined by how it treats its least capable members: the young, the old, and the mentally impaired. Whether this belief arises from religious tenents, compassion, or envy is immaterial - the proponents of the concept will wrap themselves in a mantle of self-righteous indignation that no amount of rational debate will penetrate. All you can do is claim your adherence to the logical superiority of a meritocracy and expect to be demagogued about it.

Simply stated, our schools should be a meritocracy, as should our business, our government, and of course our military. For the most part, Americans agree with this premise so it is easy to find like-minded thinkers, but you need to quickly identify those who have the opposing viewpoint because should they get into political power (they themselves could easily be of high merit), their decisions and agenda will be completely contrary to what you expect.

Don't get your panties in a bunch: OF COURSE none of this discussion implies lack of proper attention to people who need a leg up.