Why do leftists abhor the concept of a meritocracy?

[Ravi]

That's close but I think in all likelihood they didn't really consider non-white Europeans as fully human. Savages, slaves, etc.

Which is why Indians had all the rights everyone else did.
Go peddle your leftwing reviionist stupidity somewhere else. We're all full up here.

Oh you missed the part were hundreds of thousands of them were massacred for their land?

Were you sleeping in history class?

There's almost no point in responding to Rabid's posts.

 

[The Rabbi]

That's close but I think in all likelihood they didn't really consider non-white Europeans as fully human. Savages, slaves, etc.

Which is why Indians had all the rights everyone else did.
Go peddle your leftwing reviionist stupidity somewhere else. We're all full up here.

Oh you missed the part were hundreds of thousands of them were massacred for their land?

Were you sleeping in history class?

Did you miss where they were not citizens of the U.S? Or are you just plain stupid?
NEver mind, I already know the answer to that.

 

[The Rabbi]

Which is why Indians had all the rights everyone else did.
Go peddle your leftwing reviionist stupidity somewhere else. We're all full up here.

Oh you missed the part were hundreds of thousands of them were massacred for their land?

Were you sleeping in history class?

There's almost no point in responding to Rabid's posts.

Because I eat your lunch every time?
Care to respond to the post about Texas and the TSA? Or are you too afraid to admit your'e wrong and stupid?

 

[The Rabbi]

Well no.

And that's another thing..Liberals will see a flaw in their logic and work to improve that.

Conservatives never see fault in themselves.

Never.

Right Davey?

Virtyually all of your posts are a glaring refutation of this one post.

Virtyually?

What the **** is that?

It's beyond your ability to figure it out.

 

[Ravi]

Oh you missed the part were hundreds of thousands of them were massacred for their land?

Were you sleeping in history class?

There's almost no point in responding to Rabid's posts.

Because I eat your lunch every time?
Care to respond to the post about Texas and the TSA? Or are you too afraid to admit your'e wrong and stupid?

Poor you.

 

[The Rabbi]

There's almost no point in responding to Rabid's posts.

Because I eat your lunch every time?
Care to respond to the post about Texas and the TSA? Or are you too afraid to admit your'e wrong and stupid?

Poor you.

It sucks being right all the time. But what can I do when facing off against trolls like you?
I think you need to join your pals on iggy.

 

[daveman]

No, it doesn't. You're confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.

We all start the race at the same starting line. In a meritocracy, the fastest runner wins.

Leftists want everyone to arrive at the finish line at the same time.

I don't know about "Leftists" but Liberals understand that their are various skillsets that are valuable in any given society.

The fastest runner probably couldn't kick the ass of the best boxer.

How literal-minded you are!

 

[daveman]

This is partially right. Liberals at the time thought white europeans were superior to the rest of humanity. So did Conservatives at the time. The difference is that Liberals changed their viewpoint overtime and grew. Conservatives did not.

Stupidly wrong.

And I assume you aren't just referring to that particular post but virtually every post Swallow makes.

Oh, yes, it's a blanket statement.

 

[daveman]

This is partially right. Liberals at the time thought white europeans were superior to the rest of humanity. So did Conservatives at the time. The difference is that Liberals changed their viewpoint overtime and grew. Conservatives did not.

Stupidly wrong.

Well no.

And that's another thing..Liberals will see a flaw in their logic and work to improve that.

Conservatives never see fault in themselves.

Never.

Right Davey?

Again, stupidly wrong.

 

[manifold]

No, it doesn't. You're confusing equality of opportunity with equality of outcome.

We all start the race at the same starting line. In a meritocracy, the fastest runner wins.

Leftists want everyone to arrive at the finish line at the same time.

I don't know about "Leftists" but Liberals understand that their are various skillsets that are valuable in any given society.

The fastest runner probably couldn't kick the ass of the best boxer.

How literal-minded you are!

Don't be fooled. Only when it suits.

 

[Ravi]

Mani, as I said before, merit is subjective and that is why it is impractical.

Who decides merit? Do we legislate it?

If two people apply to work for you and one is highly intelligent but has an abrasive personality and the other is only moderately intelligent but has a winning personality which would you give the job?

 

[manifold]

Mani, as I said before, merit is subjective and that is why it is impractical.

Who decides merit? Do we legislate it?

If two people apply to work for you and one is highly intelligent but has an abrasive personality and the other is only moderately intelligent but has a winning personality which would you give the job?

No worries Riva. I know your schtick and every so often I feel compelled to remind you.

Not that you need my persmission, but carry on.

 

[daveman]

I don't know about "Leftists" but Liberals understand that their are various skillsets that are valuable in any given society.

The fastest runner probably couldn't kick the ass of the best boxer.

How literal-minded you are!

Don't be fooled. Only when it suits.

He doesn't have the capacity for much nuance.

 

[Sallow]

How literal-minded you are!

Don't be fooled. Only when it suits.

He doesn't have the capacity for much nuance.

Nuance? Is that French?

 

[midcan5]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/gener...e-concept-of-a-meritocracy-4.html#post3782020

What no challenges? Hm, so let's see someone raised in an upper class family who has had tutors and has attended a top ranked college, and is a wasp on top if it all, interviews for a job at a prestigious firm and lands the job over a person of less means based on merit. Actually our wasp lands a job over all applicants on merit. Is this OK and/or is this something other than merit at work? Surely the hiring explanation would be merit, so anything wrong with this picture.

Assumptions on what the founders knew, or why they did something, are another example of words like meritocracy, they excuse rather than explain. Who knows what the founders thought and how wonderfully pure their motives were. There is one thing we do know, they formed this central government under a system of checks and balances because the states couldn't get along. Think of that for a moment, the states, these wonderful places of reason and sense, a 'word today' that stands for freedom and liberty, couldn't get along.

Meritocracy and other assorted 'key words' are smoke screens for privilege and the status quo. There never was equality, or even equality of opportunity, there never will be, the difference here is the more liberal person recognizes that, the conservative hides behind a veil of words and moralistic posturing. Anyone who doubts that consider America since the last presidential election.

 

[Sallow]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/gener...e-concept-of-a-meritocracy-4.html#post3782020

What no challenges? Hm, so let's see someone raised in an upper class family who has had tutors and has attended a top ranked college, and is a wasp on top if it all, interviews for a job at a prestigious firm and lands the job over a person of less means based on merit. Actually our wasp lands a job over all applicants on merit. Is this OK and/or is this something other than merit at work? Surely the hiring explanation would be merit, so anything wrong with this picture.

Assumptions on what the founders knew, or why they did something, are another example of words like meritocracy, they excuse rather than explain. Who knows what the founders thought and how wonderfully pure their motives were. There is one thing we do know, they formed this central government under a system of checks and balances because the states couldn't get along. Think of that for a moment, the states, these wonderful places of reason and sense, a 'word today' that stands for freedom and liberty, couldn't get along.

Meritocracy and other assorted 'key words' are smoke screens for privilege and the status quo. There never was equality, or even equality of opportunity, there never will be, the difference here is the more liberal person recognizes that, the conservative hides behind a veil of words and moralistic posturing. Anyone who doubts that consider America since the last presidential election.

Bravo.

 

[daveman]

Don't be fooled. Only when it suits.

He doesn't have the capacity for much nuance.

Nuance? Is that French?

The leftist dictionary

nu·ance. noun \ˈnü-ˌän(t)s: The ability to see both sides of an issue and avoid making a judgement. Handy for excusing flip-flopping on issues. Essential for moral relativism. "You're
just not nuanced enough to see that Islamic radicals are doing what their culture demands! Who are we to judge?"

 

[daveman]

http://www.usmessageboard.com/gener...e-concept-of-a-meritocracy-4.html#post3782020

What no challenges? Hm, so let's see someone raised in an upper class family who has had tutors and has attended a top ranked college, and is a wasp on top if it all, interviews for a job at a prestigious firm and lands the job over a person of less means based on merit. Actually our wasp lands a job over all applicants on merit. Is this OK and/or is this something other than merit at work? Surely the hiring explanation would be merit, so anything wrong with this picture.

Assumptions on what the founders knew, or why they did something, are another example of words like meritocracy, they excuse rather than explain. Who knows what the founders thought and how wonderfully pure their motives were. There is one thing we do know, they formed this central government under a system of checks and balances because the states couldn't get along. Think of that for a moment, the states, these wonderful places of reason and sense, a 'word today' that stands for freedom and liberty, couldn't get along.

Meritocracy and other assorted 'key words' are smoke screens for privilege and the status quo. There never was equality, or even equality of opportunity, there never will be, the difference here is the more liberal person recognizes that, the conservative hides behind a veil of words and moralistic posturing. Anyone who doubts that consider America since the last presidential election.

So which particular The Man is keeping you down?

 

[Flopper]

Some might argue that leftism and a meritocracy are mutually exclusive ideals, but that is not really the case. There may be conflicting elements that need to be balanced, but by and large the two could definitely coexist. Yet for some reason leftists dismiss the meritocracy concept out of hand at best, and view it as an absolute evil at worst. And I just don't understand why.

Why do leftists abhor the concept of a meritocracy?

The Right seems to believes merit should be the only factor determining advancement. The Left seems to believe that there are other factors to be considering in addition to merit such as seniority. Sometime there will be a person that is clearly exceptional but often judging merit is purely subjective. Using seniority in conjunction with merit is IMHO the right method for determining advancement.

Even COngress eliminated seniority as a factor. The only places that practice that are union shops. If someone is a shitbag he doesn't become less of a shitbag because he was able to last in the system more years than someone else.
Is meritocracy an ideal system? No. But it is better than anything else I've seen proposed. Including grievance culture.

Congress has eliminated the seniority factor? You go to be kidding. Labor unions are certainly not the only place where seniority is a major factor in determining advancement. Federal civil service, which covers nearly 2 million workers, rewards seniority as do most state and local governments. Private businesses that are more concerned about the long-term future of the business in lieu of short term profits reward loyalty and seniority.

Judgment of merit in most cases in purely subjective. Let 3 managers rate a group of employees and they will agree on the best and worst. What about the rest of the group? Ratings go all over the place with little correlation. Businesses that try to award all their employees based strictly on merit find themselves with high turnover and low employee moral. It is far better to reward the very best, punish the very worst and treat majority the same.

 

[The Rabbi]

The Right seems to believes merit should be the only factor determining advancement. The Left seems to believe that there are other factors to be considering in addition to merit such as seniority. Sometime there will be a person that is clearly exceptional but often judging merit is purely subjective. Using seniority in conjunction with merit is IMHO the right method for determining advancement.

Even COngress eliminated seniority as a factor. The only places that practice that are union shops. If someone is a shitbag he doesn't become less of a shitbag because he was able to last in the system more years than someone else.
Is meritocracy an ideal system? No. But it is better than anything else I've seen proposed. Including grievance culture.

Congress has eliminated the seniority factor? You go to be kidding. Labor unions are certainly not the only place where seniority is a major factor in determining advancement. Federal civil service, which covers nearly 2 million workers, rewards seniority as do most state and local governments. Private businesses that are more concerned about the long-term future of the business in lieu of short term profits reward loyalty and seniority.

Judgment of merit in most cases in purely subjective. Let 3 managers rate a group of employees and they will agree on the best and worst. What about the rest of the group? Ratings go all over the place with little correlation. Businesses that try to award all their employees based strictly on merit find themselves with high turnover and low employee moral. It is far better to reward the very best, punish the very worst and treat majority the same.

Democrats To Upend Seniority System In Senate: Brown
Federal workers are unionized. As are state gov't workers.
At least you admit that 3 managers will agree on the best employee.
Your post confirms mine, it does not refute it.