Social Justice Warriors Thread

[Speaker to Animals]

Did anyone post this yet?

The Post-Meritocracy Manifesto

Meritocracy is a founding principle of the open source movement, and the ideal of meritocracy is perpetuated throughout our field in the way people are recruited, hired, retained, promoted, and valued.

But meritocracy has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology. The idea of merit is in fact never clearly defined; rather, it seems to be a form of recognition, an acknowledgement that “this person is valuable insofar as they are like me.”

(If you are not familiar with criticisms of meritocracy, please refer to the resources on this page.)

It is time that we as an industry abandon the notion that merit is something that can be measured, can be pursued on equal terms by every individual, and can ever be distributed fairly.

What does a post-meritocracy world look like? It is founded on a core set of values and principles, an affirmation of belonging that applies to everyone who engages in the practice of software development.

Our Values

These core values and principles are:

• We do not believe that our value as human beings is intrinsically tied to our value as knowledge workers. Our professions do not define us; we are more than the work we do.
• We believe that interpersonal skills are at least as important as technical skills.
• We can add the most value as professionals by drawing on the diversity of our identities, backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives. Homogeneity is an antipattern.
• We can be successful while leading rich, full lives. Our success and value is not dependent on exerting all of our energy on contributing to software.
• We have the obligation to use our positions of privilege, however tenuous, to improve the lives of others.
• We must make room for people who are not like us to enter our field and succeed there. This means not only inviting them in, but making sure that they are supported and empowered.
• We have an ethical responsibility to refuse to work on software that will negatively impact the well-being of other people.
• We acknowledge the value of non-technical contributors as equal to the value of technical contributors.
• We understand that working in our field is a privilege, not a right. The negative impact of toxic people in the workplace or the larger community is not offset by their technical contributions.
• We are devoted to practicing compassion and not contempt. We refuse to belittle other people because of their choices of tools, techniques, or languages.
• The field of software development embraces technical change, and is made better by also accepting social change.
• We strive to reflect our values in everything that we do. We recognize that values that are espoused but not practiced are not values at all.

Signatories
............

Dark age incoming.

[BjornP]

Did anyone post this yet?

The Post-Meritocracy Manifesto

Meritocracy is a founding principle of the open source movement, and the ideal of meritocracy is perpetuated throughout our field in the way people are recruited, hired, retained, promoted, and valued.

But meritocracy has consistently shown itself to mainly benefit those with privilege, to the exclusion of underrepresented people in technology. The idea of merit is in fact never clearly defined; rather, it seems to be a form of recognition, an acknowledgement that “this person is valuable insofar as they are like me.”

(If you are not familiar with criticisms of meritocracy, please refer to the resources on this page.)

It is time that we as an industry abandon the notion that merit is something that can be measured, can be pursued on equal terms by every individual, and can ever be distributed fairly.

What does a post-meritocracy world look like? It is founded on a core set of values and principles, an affirmation of belonging that applies to everyone who engages in the practice of software development.

Our Values

These core values and principles are:

• We do not believe that our value as human beings is intrinsically tied to our value as knowledge workers. Our professions do not define us; we are more than the work we do.
• We believe that interpersonal skills are at least as important as technical skills.
• We can add the most value as professionals by drawing on the diversity of our identities, backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives. Homogeneity is an antipattern.
• We can be successful while leading rich, full lives. Our success and value is not dependent on exerting all of our energy on contributing to software.
• We have the obligation to use our positions of privilege, however tenuous, to improve the lives of others.
• We must make room for people who are not like us to enter our field and succeed there. This means not only inviting them in, but making sure that they are supported and empowered.
• We have an ethical responsibility to refuse to work on software that will negatively impact the well-being of other people.
• We acknowledge the value of non-technical contributors as equal to the value of technical contributors.
• We understand that working in our field is a privilege, not a right. The negative impact of toxic people in the workplace or the larger community is not offset by their technical contributions.
• We are devoted to practicing compassion and not contempt. We refuse to belittle other people because of their choices of tools, techniques, or languages.
• The field of software development embraces technical change, and is made better by also accepting social change.
• We strive to reflect our values in everything that we do. We recognize that values that are espoused but not practiced are not values at all.

Signatories
............

Ech... the degree of pining for, and expecting that one's co-workers constantly validate who and what they are, and what they do outside of work, it's just...needy, embarrassing, really cringe-inducingly embarrassing. Can't even be bothered to get angry at this.

I do like that very last bit about values that are espoused but not practised aren't values, at all. At least three members of my family work in tech firms or are educating themselves to work in that sector, my brother's a board member in a tech firm. Never heard him or my two nephews "belittle people because of their choice of tools". Either that's a thing among American tech professionals (not sure), or as I suspect, they're just voicing the prejudices they have. In which case, good that they want to do away with that, but maybe don't expect everyone else in your profession to have those views about people who aren't tech professionals?

[DBTrek]

May as well just rename that thing the Loser List.

They whine and complain that meritocracy is biased toward “privilege” (which is demonstrably false by the very definition of the word), then contend that meritocracy isn’t actually real, then demand that the non-real (but biased) meritocracy be abandoned.

Maybe it should actually be called the Stupid Loser List.
Damn.

[Speaker to Animals]

They defined merit as "people who agree with me" which, albeit totally false, belies what they are really about since it constitutes a form of projection. They assume we all function as they do, or want to.

[Speaker to Animals]

It also goes back to what that Swedish philosopher defined as inner and outer circle power structures. This nonsense is the product of women and highly feminized men trying to organize and wield outer circle power in the same fashion as women traditionally wield inner circle power. The inner circle is more about outcomes and making life at least bearable for most participants. Outer circle power is about competency and results. It makes no room for these inner circle concerns because that will get us all killed.

Women need to step up and act somewhat like men in that they must compete on their results, and he held accountable for their failures, if they want to join us in the outer circle. They also need to allow men to operate in the inner circle which they currently have no I mention of allowing to happen.

[jediuser598]

If they're going to criticize meritocracy, you do it from a results based perspective.

Who gets to define what merit is? Well it's traditionally those that are in power, but in a practical sense, those who are in power aren't always wrong. If those in power, (who define what merit is), have a system that lifts people up based purely on real world production, not skin color, gender, hair color, or beliefs, then that is a very good thing. In that system, differences don't matter, it's just results. That is actually one of the best "social justice" environments imagined.

A person who is interested in results based social justice really should leave that system alone.

[DBTrek]

If they're going to criticize meritocracy, you do it from a results based perspective.

Meritocracy is results based, so again, these people are actually stupid and their screed, embarrassing.

[jediuser598]

If they're going to criticize meritocracy, you do it from a results based perspective.

Meritocracy is results based, so again, these people are actually stupid and their screed, embarrassing.

Ok, so the best novel ever made is the one that made the most money.

50 shades of grey is one of the best pieces of literature ever made.

Do you find that to be true?

The American way of determining good art, "did it make money? No? Then it's not good."

[Martin Hash]

I will post the values of The Patriarchy again, in case people have forgotten: Liberty, Meritocracy & Nationalism

The other side, the losers in the meritocracy, are going to be against all of these things.

[Martin Hash]

If they're going to criticize meritocracy, you do it from a results based perspective.

Meritocracy is results based, so again, these people are actually stupid and their screed, embarrassing.

Ok, so the best novel ever made is the one that made the most money.

50 shades of grey is one of the best pieces of literature ever made.

Do you find that to be true?

The American way of determining good art, "did it make money? No? Then it's not good."

Meritocracy works up to a point then it's all luck, baby.