Asklemmy

43901 readers

1347 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

Do you believe in meritocracy? Why or why not? (lemmy.dbzer0.com)

submitted 9 months ago by Danterious@lemmy.dbzer0.com to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

107 comments fedilink hide all child comments

This is the definition I am using:

a system, organization, or society in which people are chosen and moved into positions of success, power, and influence on the basis of their demonstrated abilities and merit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 3 points 9 months ago (16 children)

The issue will always be reality. In theory, meritocracy and even geniocracy sounds promosing but so does our current system.

The reality is that incompetent or malicious people will always find ways to corrupt the idea.

At this point, I‘m pretty sure the only way to go forward is to think in new ways. Maybe general AI will work, or anarchy (more like anarcho communist probably).

We tried and broke everything:

representative democracy - politicians lie to get into office and do their thing after
autocracy - the person in charge freaks out and becomes a lifetime ruler
communism - people starve while the politicians become rich
monarchy - the bloodline will produce some idiot who breaks stuff - also no reason to be this rich
multiparty system - will get little done and devolves into populism as well
two party system - devolves into hating the other party

The real problem imo is that a few people just cant make decisions for the masses over an extended time. Its too much power and responsibility.

I‘m pretty sure a more direct democracy represents this day and age more since the majority sees how our world goes to shit.

[–] xilliah@beehaw.org 2 points 9 months ago (8 children)

A direct democracy can be corrupted via social engineering, see brexit.

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 2 points 9 months ago (4 children)

I‘m not saying direct democracy cant be broken but britain isnt a direct democracy. Its like giving someone a bike who drove a car all their lives. They crash and hurt themselves and someone says „look! Bikes are dangerous!“

There are no direct (or mostly direct) democracies in the world afaik. Feel free to prove otherwise.

[–] pranaless@beehaw.org 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

I believe Switzerland has direct democracy, no?

[–] haui_lemmy@lemmy.giftedmc.com 3 points 9 months ago

In part, but not fully. They still have full time reprenstative offices. Direct democracy would get along without those afaik.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

load more comments (12 replies)