The Necessity Of Meritocracy

We find ourselves living in an age and culture of entitlement which has significantly contributed to modern degeneracy: the undeserving are given responsibilities and positions which they don’t merit, leading to yet even lower productivity and standards. People are made to believe that they can do things which they actually might not be able to perform, because the collectivist liberal herd believes that they can.

The (often voluntary) failure to correctly determine a person’s ability in the name of social equality—and sometimes conscious disregard of a person’s potential and nature before handing over responsibility and authority—has often resulted in scenarios where the leaders of a people were the worst individuals from among them.


Feminism similarly trains women to believe and to do roles what they are not naturally suited for, and later makes them appear stupid when they can’t perform them. But at the same time, feminism expects men to stupidly avoid judging women in the name of gender equality. The same scenario can be seen in other walks of life. What we are actually witnessing today is the modern war on meritocracy.

A twisted war in the name of equality and justice

Humanity is indeed imperfect. True and absolute equality is technically impossible and rarely believed in, because of the uniqueness of every individual in both strength and weaknesses.

Thus the concept of meritocracy does threaten those who feel that they might not be qualified to receive its benefits. These individuals might then try to undermine and destroy the meritocracy, as well as the meritorious. This war has existed since antiquity itself.

An example can be found in religious scripture, the Biblical story of Cain and Abel being one – God chose Abel because of his moral merit, which led to Cain slaying him out of jealousy.


It could be interpreted that the first human murder recorded in religious history was actually borne out of an inability of the undeserving to accept spiritual meritocracy.

But keeping religious examples aside, meritocracy has always threatened the degenerate, for it often represents unemotional and cold-blooded qualitative justice which modern liberals might label as “cruel.” The desire to be equalized with the meritorious is commonly seen today: the undeserving (without producing effort or evidence of their merit) are vociferous in their demands for equality with those who are deserving.

But sprinkling gold dust on shit doesn’t make it gold, even if liberals might try to equalize both.

Furthermore, the common criticisms of meritocracy by its liberal opponents are: what and who defines merit (thus raising the question which standard is the best standard), the reliability of those who measure merit (free from favoritism), and the supposedly sluggish growth of people in a meritocratic society—supposedly exemplified by the Peter Principle.

Without meritocracy, degeneracy will eventually rule in the name of equality

Opponents of meritocracy often deliberately overlook the real goal of meritocracy, which is to inspire and propel humanity to strive against the natural flaws of human nature .

At the same time, meritocracy’s prime focus is the creation of quality and discovery of meritorious potential in a human society, leading to higher productivity. The quantitative creation of a “perfect” society of “elite individuals” due to it comes much later but only when every individual seriously undertakes the responsibility that meritocracy demands from everyone – that is of self improvement.

Human history has many examples of the rise of civilizations, military, and political powers due to the application of meritocracy. Meritocracy not only means a system which rewards talent and hard work, but also signifies a system that awards responsibilities on virtue of their potential and merit.


But what modern collectivists and liberals actually fail to understand is that civilization suffers more from the glaring hypocrisies and degeneracy created by modern liberal collectivism, than the the supposed “elitism” created by meritocracy.

When the meritorious are treated like idiots (as seen in this story), what incentives are left for a modern man to strive to evolve into the highest ideals of masculinity, when he would be subsequently treated like trash by a society which lacks gratitude to quality?

How would quality be created in a society, where the the meritorious are lumped together with the degenerate in the same herd in the name of social equality? Equality promoted by collectivism and feminism is a hypocritical sham, and is in fact a greater dysfunctional myth.


Since collectivism and social equality is gradually supplanting meritocracy, it’s no surprise to note the corresponding fall of moral standards. The one who disengages and breaks free from the collectivist liberal herd is shamed. As commonly seen, the modern man is taught to develop himself to the highest levels of masculinity, to invest it in sub-standard modern women today – more often due to a lack of quality options created by the slutty herd mentality of modern women.

When quality is shamed and shunned in favor of quantity, how could one expect to retain and create quality in such a degenerate collectivist civilization?



The truth remains that in today’s social decline, meritocracy still remains important—for it can and should be best employed as a necessary counterweight to the dysfunctional rise of socialist and collectivist entitlement.

Every noble system or ideal, even that of meritocracy, would fail as long as flawed human nature stands in the way of its implementation. Human nature is indeed imperfect, but to to strive for perfection and self-improvement is praiseworthy. Meritocracy often provides the necessary platform and impetus for that.

Read Next: Be Qualified, Not Entitled

153 thoughts on “The Necessity Of Meritocracy”

  1. Meritocracy and hyerarchy are two concepts which should not be absent from a society. However, too much of that is bound to create men without willpower and turn many into absolute yes men with no ability to think for themselves.!

  2. Achievement is difficult, perilous and fraught with sacrifice.
    So why do it if the rewards go to someone, often anyone else???
    Fed up with the ‘equality’ of outcome our taxation and redistribution system really IS.
    The next step for the SJW parasities. Wait for it, its coming…… ‘Achievement privilege’

    1. Until we rescind the franchise and higher education for these entitled, brain-stems with tits, we as a species will continue to devolve at break-neck speeds. If my daughter ever so much as thought about college I’d beat the stupid off her smug, disobedient face.

      1. And her lack of confidence instilled by your domineering attitude is what will cause her to rebel and breed with white trash.
        But you knew that, because not even trolls are as think as you pretend to be.

    1. No silicon valley “miracle” without the government. It didnt come outta nowhere

    2. I don’t see things as left/right much but I did make a big deal when Tim Cook made a talk about diversity and he made the statement that he was unhappy and Apple has a long way to go on improving its diversity.
      *EVEN THOUGH APPLE IS MORE DIVERSE THAN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A WHOLE*. I honestly do not know what he meant by that. Does it mean he wants even fewer white males working there?
      Whites were about 20 % underrepresented based on their proportion of the population. Maybe he is a closet MRA and wants to boost white hiring?

      1. Maybe he believes that by having a strong variation of backgrounds and skills in his company he can succeed much better, a self organised team of well diverse skilled people who are not bickering about gender or colour superiority or susseptible to groupthink will evolve faster and do amazing innovative things.
        What he doesnt want is to be forced to stick to *any* kind of legislation that chooses his workforce for him thats not based on optimal productivity and company growth.
        Having a staff that exactly matches the distribution of the area, will result in a team that matches the behaviour of the area. Which is definitely not ‘the brightest and the best’ or a particularly optimal mix of skills for the companies own goal.
        Its definitely not a meritocricy if you think you should be hired because white men are underrepresented. That would be hypocrisy, or at best, lame sarcasm.

        1. OK, so based on those stats, what “improvement” should Apple make? Hiring more Asians? I could see an argument for that but I seriously doubt that’s what he meant.

        2. Well, I’m not a business manager so Ive really no suggestions as to how apple can improve their diversity, beyond what I already suggested as a possible interpretation of the guys statement. I didn’t give any stats.
          Ive no intention of being drawn into a debate on whether people of any particular ethnic, social, or cultural background would be better at a job, since the original quote was about diversity having value, it must have value, since he wants more of it.
          But my general idea was that an improvement might be made by hiring skilled people who are not bickering about gender or color superiority or susceptible to groupthink, and the improvement would be that the company would will evolve faster and do amazing innovative things.
          Were you asking me to translate those sentences into more dummy terms? Lets consider this, when labeling the girls you try to pick up, do you refer to ‘the hot one’, ‘the dumb one’, ‘the slutty one’, in your group of mates, do you have ‘the smart one’, ‘the tough one’ and ‘sporty spice’? Do you hate it in a new group when you get a label that doesn’t suit you or match what you had previously.
          Have you noticed that people are happier and less prone to compete and argue when they have a unique contribution to a group that defines their role a little and gives them a sense of personal responsibility. At work, are you the smart one, the funny one, the strong one, do you know things on a subject that others don’t, that you feel a bit of an expert in? do you feel good about that? do you listen to and respect the opinion of another who is better than you at some other topic or skill, and are able to do that more when you know you have your own valid contribution you are also respected for. Is it nice to feel that you are useful in a way that makes you not dispensable and easily replaced with a dumber cheaper person?
          Does it work better in your groups when everyone feels good about their value and ability to contribute? Does it work worse when there are 10 white lads who all play football and drink beer who clump together who ignore the contributions of people who are not in their in-group, and there are 5 black guys who hang out together because they feel safer with people who don’t hate on them, and another group of assorted misfits of varying backgrounds, would any of you feel better when suddenly 10 asians are hired all at once? Do you all have different ideas about which group is ‘better’?
          So if we go back to a huge company like apple, you’ve got admin types, programmer types, design types and plenty more. People can group according to knowledge, age range, music interests, skill level, all sorts of things, no-one feels like they have to be in some group based on irrelevant things like skin color, no-one has to be in only one group. Everyone can find someone they can collaborate with for work or socially and all their ideas can be freely combined in so many ways that good ideas will bubble up. Every problem in the company will be experienced by such a variation of people that no-one can put it down to race or stupidity or any other irrelevance, every idea or solution has a chance to grow in many different environments, the optimal version will be found quicker and wont be eliminated by undesirable selection mechanisms like predatory assholes. This is what happens in a self-organized team – ideas evolve, culture changes, money is made.
          So long as there is less chance of clumping together weeds who are aggressively insecure who want to undermine the ideas of others, the ground is fertile for growing everything. You just have to hire people who have something to contribute. Race, religion, gender, and political affiliations have nothing to do with true diversity.
          Ive labored the point a bit, but its a meritocracy, that doesn’t mean white men are best and get all the jobs, it means good ideas get done and good staff get rewarded.
          I really don’t think the guy’s statement that Apple were not diverse enough had anything to do with meeting quotas of political correctness, I think he is using the word in an evolutionary context. Rapid growth, or survival in times of rapid change, needs maximum diversity of ideas, skills, technology.

      2. Tim Cook is typical frustrated gay guy. Its straight peoples fault he can’t get enough gay sex. He must be persecuted because he’s so butt ugly.

    3. I don’t understand that. Santa Clara county has an Asian plurality and San Mateo County a white plurality. Both are in the greater Bay Area, which is among the most liberal in the US. What is not for liberals to like?

    4. Silicon Valley cannot possibly be a meritocracy when it goes full retard with diversity and quota for the undeserving.

  3. Another problem with anti-meritocracy is you eventually make those people who actually have talent and vision hate the society from which they came.
    Even if they find success after putting in the risk, they might take their investment somewhere else and never look back.

    1. You just described my shithole organization where diversity trumps competence and qualifications.

        1. It’s amazing how feminists have convinced people that 51% of the population is a “minority”

        2. Yup, and graduate women in professional jobs are earning 2% more than men, because theres more of them.
          Now all you have to do is improve your own skills to start earning more than average, I think thats why a meritocricy is possible to achieve now. If you dont want a tipping point, and you really think you are better, youve no choice, Work together, with workers of all types, to remove all abuses of corporate power, then if youre the best at what you do you get more pay and if youre not you can always resort to imidation and cowardly ways to gain a relative advantage that doesnt add growth value to the employer.

        3. What is more amazing is that a cupid survey of women on men’s looks said women think 80% of men are below average. That is what we get for 10,000 years of men paying for pussy- women who can’t see straight.

      1. Many coloreds are more meritious than many whites I’ve met. As far as women goes, men are only more meritious with respects to more oxen like demands. Otherwise, women can boss the same as men.
        Most people I meet are inept. Its the result of an average IQ which by definition covers the majority of the population.

    2. Meritocracy used to be the basis of the once principled left.
      Now it’s considered fascist.
      Yes, that’s where we’re at

        1. You can increase equality of opportunity without actually getting it fully. And your latter comment is true up to a certain point. Because you will over time get an aristocracy that is genuinely talented.

    3. this is actually what happened to me. I left my supposedly first world country to a place where they would actually accept me on merit than whether they liked me. I just wish I left earlier.

      1. Where did u go if I may ask.
        I’m in the process of saving money to make a move and any info is appreciated. Some naysayers claim it is really just the same everywhere but I don’t buy it.

        1. Im with you brother. Trying to leave the USA for Europe meself through corporate transfer.
          I know its pick your poison btw the Muslims of Eurabia or the Feminazi SJWs of the USSA. But dammit Euro women are friendlier & easier to date (which can translate to banging).
          I guess i’ll put up with the rape jihad & infidel slaughter vs being sexless lol

        2. Australia. It’s a blue pill country and in many ways it’s worse but as far as work & money is concerned it’s legit. Women still get the p-pass here but nepotism is much less rampant because of the availability & quality of jobs. The women are atrocious though.

        3. I spent two summers in Australia but that was over 20 years ago. I liked the women back then, but maybe they have gone downhill in terms of attitude. A quick search at OKC shows some nice looking once in my top matches, although it seems the Asians have all but completed their invasion.

        4. Id avoid anywhere invaded and repopulated by British, or those who invaded there (its all well correlated with homophobia and superiority heirarchies)
          As a guy, if youre well skilled youll be very happy in Germany, if you want something more friendly try Ireland. But you still have to show your bosses respect wherever you go, the English derived bosses are just worse because they make up their own rules to keep you guessing though, no pragmatism, just dark triad noise.

        5. I keep hearing good things about Germany.
          Seems like a good place to develop a career. You think the women are a step up?

        6. I’ve met Aussie women during travels and I could not believe how dumb ad obnoxious they were. Never met women like that before, drunken slobs. A drunk Irish woman has much more class and a sense of humour.
          If the work is good though that sounds like a step up. Unemployment in NAmerica is still high. I would consider it just for the work/weather.

        7. German women of wall age are the largest set of customers at Dignitas, so its a fair bet youll find some grateful younger ones.
          Joking aside, I spoke to a skilled german woman recently, the men are a bit superior but the quality of life means she would never choose to be anywhere else. All the german women I have met are impressive to me, but they are not baywatch babes.
          I think this means everyone there is playing a higher quality game, but you have *a lot* of alternative cultures a border-free train ride away, if its not spot on for you.

        8. When I was in Australia 2 years ago, it felt great to me–kind of like how I think America was in the 1950s–everyone is optimistic, great economy, they have little to no debt, everyone seems happy, food is great, most things produced locally, the typical saying is “No worries mate” but its extremely isolated. I was there with an ex gf so can’t speak to the local girls. I have always heard negative things about Aussie women (then again, doubt they’re any worse than what we have here).
          However, there is a HUGE Asian influence, something like 1/6 of their economy is from wealthy Chinese coming there for University, tourism, etc. So I think if you like Asian women you can always just go for that. I did see some fit, attractive Asians in nice summer dresses.
          I think their government is at least as bureaucratic as north America however, and wouldn’t expect it to be any more free.. Also as one guy there told me.. only one country was stupid enough to go to EVERY SINGLE war with the USA.. and it’s Australia. haha. I think there is a big difference between city and country life there, so surely one could find a good fit. Now, I REALLY want to check out New Zealand…everyone from Oz loved it.

        9. Cool. The good money and beautiful weather makes it a very attractive option. From everything I’ve seen and heard the aussie-anglo-women are trash, but I’m not surprised that the Asian women there are decent+.
          Similar story in Canada, the West coast and Toronto are all bought out by rich Asians that get their Canadian citizenship for the healthcare. This is partly why Canadian natives can’t afford to own property in their major cities, these wealthy Asians are taking over lol. I doubt they suffer from the same pussy-whipped mind-set we’ve been nurturing here in the west and take their shit more seriously.

        10. Oh also they were advertising jobs in the paper in Melbourne in my field for bachelors degree making $100,000 Aussie a year, which seemed like a really good deal to me. If that’s what’s in the paper, if you are really talented, I think it would be possible to make more than that if you searched around. It’s hard to make $100k in the USA working for someone else. You can do it in business for yourself, but then you are taking a lot of risks and can’t be as carefree.

        11. 100000 job and all u need is a bachelors?
          A bachelors here makes u overqualified for Starbucks lol.
          I heard eh money there was good I didn’t realize my standards were so low

        12. The cost of living is higher there, ie it was hard to find dinner in a restaurant for less than $30 a person for just the entrée. That’s about double what I pay back home. Housing was also very high. I stayed in an air-b-n-b apartment and the guy said he paid something like $600,000 for it. It was your average place that would be like 150-200k where I live in the US. So don’t think you’re getting 3x what you are with a $35,000 job in the west. But yes, you are doing better over there for sure, and it’s a more modern economy with good public transport, clean streets, safe, etc. I work in finance, however, mining is huge there so anything related to that industry they are always hiring…
          Also those prices were city prices and you could probably live in the country dirt cheap, because it’s a huge place. Also I like how they have friendly signs like “Hey mate, pull over if you’re tired!” where in the US they prefer an asshole cop to pull you over and intimidate you and write you a $300 ticket. Another thing is the airports are state of the art and you can hop on a plane going only through a metal detector, carry a bottle of wine or any other liquid you want, they are not afraid of water lol.

        13. You share a lot of useful information I appreciate it.
          So I went to the Spanish consulate and they rejected my offer for Spanish passport. Something about how my mom had to forfeit her citizenship when she left. Bummer. I’m going to look into my Italian background and perhaps I can make that work. If either one doesn’t so be it. I think I’m heading to Asia anyways.
          Australia sounds like a beautiful place though I must admit, sans all the hyper-progressive social values (i.e., fat-chicks). So long as you can step away from that into a nicer area then I guess it is like taking a day trip to the circus, no harm no foul.

    4. Hating society is misplaced. They should be misantropists. Too many people want to be donald trumpski

  4. Interesting choice for the main photo. A war medal like the Iron Cross was specifically awarded for meritous actions in or out of battle during times of war.
    Now, the US military hands out medals like candy to people who drone wedding parties in 3rd world desert societies while sitting behind a video game console, kidnap unarmed fathers in the middle of the night to be tortured and imprisoned, and just sign up for extra heapings of “war”. Just look at this interminable list of “medals” one can earn in the US military.
    In contrast, the German army, probably the most well respected modern fighting army (post Napoleonic) has just a few derivations of the Iron Cross, and it meant a LOT to have one.

        1. Yes, and based on their medal count, it’s definitely best Korea. They clearly win call of duty.

        2. Yes, they are NK generals. Few of them reach retirement, though. Kim likes to purge.

        3. The medal on the right was for sucking the dick of the communist party chairman. The one next to it was for a reach-around on the deputy general”

    1. Not true for the Marines. If you’re wearing a personal decoration there, especially one with a “V” or one that is awarded solely for heroism, you fucking earned it.

  5. Women have destroyed America’s education system, but thanks to H1B (meritocracy) this destruction is less obvious:

    1. A very important point. I credit the Nazis with most of America’s dominance today. Hitler drove out many bright minds in the 1930s, and America was one of the only safe places to flee to. The remaining brilliant minds who stayed in Germany to fight for their nation were funneled to either Russia or the USA through Operation Paperclip, after the US entered the war open seeing that Germany would lose.
      The nuclear bomb was only developed in the USA through German insights (Oppenheimer, Einstein). The rocket was only developed in the USA due to Werner von Braun and others. These led to dominance in airplane production, space, military, and other endeavors and are directly related to the contributions of German or Nazi minds.
      These minds gave the USA a strong boost in the arm, but that generation is dying out now, and the best remaining source of growth and innovation is by attracting geniuses through H1B. Heck, even regular immigrants, including those who cross without permission, are a self selected group of the most ambitious and hard working, and have higher than average rates of productivity, entrepreneurship, and savings.
      The US made the fundamental mistake of destroying its society to the point where immigrants (and many homegrowns) no longer *WANT* to live here, so you see Chinese science PhDs returning to China, Indian tech students returning to India, and even day laborers I have met from Guatemala and Jamaica tell me they are only here for a few years to save up money and then return to their societies.
      The US needs immigrants both for their expertise and for their capital. Watch over the next 20 years and see more “green card purchase” programs crop up. The only way to sustain the quality of life and government that the US has without drastically raising taxes is by injections of foreign money. Already, there is a program where “investors” of a few hundred thousand can get an automatic passport. This or something like it will accelerate.

        1. His parents immigrated to the US from Germany shortly before his birth. He wrote his doctoral thesis in German. He was not a direct result of the Nazis, although he was a first generation German American, which I would consider as a German. But yes, his classification is not as clear as the others.

        2. Einstein’s theories laid the groundwork, but he had nothing to do with the bomb- he objected to its being built.

      1. The USA has plenty of English and German genetic stock, the same groups of people in question. The problem with the USA is cultural. We elevate athletes and celebrities while mocking intelligent people as nerds and dorks.

        1. Yes, hence the point where it is now driving away the best and brightest. The immigrants come for their education or their money, and then leave. MGTOW like Roosh are beginning to do the same. There are record levels of emigration of people leaving the US, especially for retirement (although the numbers are still relatively low, in the tens of thousands annually I believe).

        2. “We elevate athletes and celebrities while mocking intelligent people as nerds and dorks.”
          The self proclaimed “intelligent” people in USA are nerds and dorks, for example: Obama and Al Gore (“I invented the Internet,” and the polar ice caps should already be gone by now). How the really intelligent people in the USA are viewed varies from cavemen, rednecks, racists, homophobics, to domestic terrorists.

      2. Ze Germans built both the U.S. and the Soviet space programs.. Amazing, I must say… I have utmost respect for the German nation.

      3. American dominance derived from one place – its constitution.
        The founding fathers were some of the greatest minds to have lived and they knew how the human mind related to society

        1. Yes, but alas, as GW Bush so eloquently put it, “The constitution is nothing but a Goddamn piece of paper” and it no longer has much impact on how America operates. It certainly no longer restricts the government from doing anything, other than maybe quartering troops. Nah, instead it just taxes you and builds homes for the troops to live in.

        2. Obama has eviscerated it. 2016 will probably be the final nails in the coffin for the grand experiment that was the American Republic.

        3. 1965 was the nail in the coffin. The corpse inside just hasn’t stopped screaming yet…

        4. The stimulus will fund shovel-ready jobs.
          I am focused like a laser on creating jobs.
          The IRS is not targeting anyone.
          It was a spontaneous riot about a movie.
          If I had a son…..
          I will put an end to the type of politics that “breeds division, conflict and cynicism”.
          You didn’t build that!
          I will restore trust in Government.
          The Cambridge cops acted stupidly.
          The public will have 5 days to look at every bill that lands on my desk
          It’s not my red line – it is the world’s red line.
          Whistle blowers will be protected in my administration.
          We got back every dime we used to rescue the banks and auto companies, with interest.
          I am not spying on American citizens.
          ObamaCare will be good for America
          You can keep your family doctor.
          Premiums will be lowered by $2500.
          If you like it, you can keep your current healthcare plan
          It’s just like shopping at Amazon
          I knew nothing about “Fast and Furious” gun-running to Mexican drug cartels
          I knew nothing about IRS targeting conservative groups
          I knew nothing about what happened in Benghazi
          Sealed all of his academic records
          Unilaterally changed his Obamacare law numerous times
          Usurps the constitution with his blanket amnesty for illegals
          There’s more but I’m getting tired. If you want to blame W for it all be my guest. He was a lousy President. This man is evil.

        5. That’s excellent. I would say the period between 1964-68 sealed the fate of this country. Just a minor distinction.

        6. They are all evil, its a pre requisite.
          Wow, what a list. To think, this country RE ELECTED this shitbag.

        7. See, you actually named things Obama could be legitimately blamed for, whereas the earlier post was all stuff W did. They are both evil but that doesn’t mean we should lie about them or pretend that 100% of what they do is wrong. IE The Republicans like Marco Rubio attacking Obama for ending the embargo with Cuba. lol really? That’s what you pick to attack him on??? Just proves that both parties are utterly corrupt and the next president from whichever party will have even a longer dirty laundry list than the one you posted above.

        8. What blew my mind is that he got MORE VOTES for his reelection. I reluctantly voted for the guy the first time, only because I was already in the voting booth and John McCain is an insane man who would have started war with Iran. But no way in hell would I support OB after I saw what he actually did. But that only made him *more* popular. Go figure.

      4. Even southern Mexico is a more attractive place now, with new middle class jobs created from the new auto plants, distribution hubs thanks to the new Panama canals and other industries that allows them to serve both north and south Americas. Most illegals are now from areas ruined by the American War on Drugs.

      5. >>are a self selected group of the most ambitious and hard working, and
        have higher than average rates of productivity, entrepreneurship, and
        A correction here. MALE Mexican illegals are ambitious and hard working. Female Mexicans want sexual liberty and copious government benefits without a husband. In my opinion.

    2. Chinese and Indians aren’t generally accepted to PhD programs because they are the cream of the crop, but because they have nothing to lose and are the most docile. They are willing to put up with a lot more bullshit than a native American or a European student, and have no problem with spending *all* their available time in the lab. They work, eat ramen, and follow the orders of their thesis advisor to the letter. They don’t want to go back to China or India with the stigma of being a failure, and this is exploited by those at the top of the food chain in academic research.

      1. The other problem with Chinese students is they are taught by rote for 12 years, do well in their bachelors, but then have a fuck of a time doing any lateral thinking or original research.

  6. Genghis Khan is the all time alpha male, apex killer , supreme red piller. I read a biography about him. Upon taking a city or conquering a country he would kill all the “academics” , lawyers and bureaucrats i.e. useless folk . If you were a craftsman , had a trade you were spared .

    1. I voted you up for the sake of accuracy. However, the substance of the quote has merit.

      1. I have to disagree. Everyone is not a genius. There are lots of true dumbasses out there.

  7. A young guy in my church just married a girl who got her PhD in math – which is a pretty impressive feat seeing as no woman alive has meritocratically ever so much as even passed a pre-calculus course without a whole lot of professor dick being sucked behind the scenes. We bought this kid an OTC AIDS test as a congratulations gag gift (although the entire fucking world except for this naive kid knows the only one gagging was his wife).

    1. “which is a pretty impressive feat seeing as no woman alive has meritocratically ever so much as even passed a pre-calculus course”
      Even fewer have contributed anything of worth to the field of mathematics, or any science for that matter.

  8. America always loved winners and underdogs. America despised losers. By all means we have to restore these values at all levels.

    1. Daniel Boone was a loser who ended up with nothing but a rocking chair on his son’s porch.
      David Crockett lost even more than that.
      Yet they were legends in their own time and there are elements of America that still admire them. Life, even in America, is not a football game and winning isn’t the only thing. Sometimes it really is how you played the game.

  9. I understand what the article is saying…It does apply to women, minorities, etc…
    I would like to add a couple of things though.. The meritocracy still applies to men. If you are a loser, America will chew you up and spit you out, and nobody will ever know you even existed.
    As a winner, you take it all.. and I mean all of it. There is no in between today. You either are or you are nothing. So let’s keep our eyes on the prize, do what we do and stop whining. When the big reset happens, boys will be separated from men anyway.

      1. Not sure about the drive to achieve, but it instills a huge desire to not fail.. failure is equivalent to death in America.. and I kinda like it that way..

    1. As a winner, you take it all
      I understand the sentiment, but not necessarily true for so many talented or hard working people. In the past, those with the best and brightest minds were diverted into medicine, or science, or research, or engineering ie Bell Labs, Dow Chemical, etc. and there were amazing innovations made in those industries.
      Today the best and brightest are encouraged to go into Finance. I know because I looked at my options and this was by far the best one for me. Now, I didn’t go all the way as many of my colleages did and enter wall street earning 6 figures (you have to work horrible hours and basically turn into an asshole), but this nonproductive field is where we are now sending our best and brightest. We tell our smartest that instead of studying a disease, researching an engineering problem, or becoming a philosopher, they should become F9 monkeys. (google it)
      Those who actually want to do something useful with their lives, other than shuffling around numbers in a computer, are often stuck in $30,000 a year jobs (if they are not one of the 100 million Americans out of work!) and are never rewarded property for their expertise.
      One problem is that capitalism doesn’t reward what is good or needed, only whatever makes the most money. And today our society will give higher ratings to a show about Kim Kardashians Butt than a show about the origins of the universe or an interesting history program. But popularity or success in the marketplace does NOT equate to quality or utility of a good or service.

      1. I understand what you are saying. Believe me, I do.. Yes, I agree with you that’s why I said there’s no in between… It’s either or but the model is the same as it always has been for men.
        You slipped something in there…
        “only whatever makes the most money” What movie was that…?
        “What else is out there, besides money”..
        Edit: I am only talking about the men’s condition here.. it’s all I care about.. Kardashians.. they can go fuck themselves..

      2. ”One problem is that capitalism doesn’t reward what is good or needed, only whatever makes the most money”
        Capitalism is merely a way of efficiently allocating resources and is also a reflection of human nature given its free market nature not a value system. When there is a spiritual void then the ills attributed to: “Capitalism” happen.

        1. It is based on a system of wants rather than needs or any sort of moral values: those need to be supplied elsewhere. If 10 million people want to shell out 12 bucks on a movie then goodie for those involved in satisfying that want: $120 million to go around. Brain surgeons make good money, but generally not as much as a movie or athletic star.

        2. That’s true. But it is also true that the customer or consumer ultimately determines which products and services and capitalist environments prevail. The trashiness of “Capitalism” is just as much the product of the choices of the masses as the markets themselves.
          The example of EA being alive despite their many money-grabbing crappy products and gutting of development studios is an example of this. The fact that idiots keep buying and supporting their practices.

        3. If the consumer base is a bunch of idiots then don’t expect quality products to prevail. Consumer activism can be a good thing; I say “can” because it is usually SJWs who have nothing better to do that get involved in it.

      3. some time after WW2 in America, men were convinced that a corporate job and pension was the road to success. You can go out on your own or with a few trusted partners and separate yourself in any field if you are great.
        The market rewards anything that is in demand that can be produced in quantity, including narcissist celebrity trash. In my opinion this is where a person can fail. An idea is only as good as what the market wants, and then only good if you can do it efficiently. There are lots of things on the market that are trash that get consumed, while the product you have seems great….to yourself. If your busting your ass and not earning, you need to analyze what you are doing wrong so that you can adjust.
        A typical mans labor wont earn much, unless it can be leveraged and scaled up. 100, 200 k is a respectable salary, but to make more, and crucially, have free time, you have to learn to use other people’s skills to amplify what you can produce.

    2. “As a winner, you take it all.. and I mean all of it. There is no in between today. You either are or you are nothing.”
      This mentality is why you americans are so easily manipulated. In a society of individualism, the groups that sticks together and help one another take over. Your country is run by the jews – just look at Netanyaho’s speech at Congress. And what do the jews meet as opponents? Just greedy individuals. Easy game.
      Hitler and the Germans understood this concept in the 30’s. I believe that was the main reason somebody had a need to stop them with a war….

  10. Also don’t forget that when undeserving people get jobs just because they are women or from some other group, deserving and talented people do not get one. Plenty of competent men are unemployed because of this.

    1. That’s the problem in a nutshell, when the smart ones opt out of the game because they realise it is rigged and not worthy of their time and energy. It is happening in academia and it is happening in the corporate world.

      1. You seriously think the game is rigged against you? That there are more incomptent women than incompetent men, that the bitching here isnt caused by incomptent men who need to level up their skills to keep their job.
        Im sorry that there are women doing your job as adequately as you, maybe they are think but working harder.
        We get the same thing in the UK with lazy people complaining about the Polish earning more at piece-rate work. I would rather pay half the rate to a polish man with a van who does not insult me or throw my stuff around, and add in a bonus, than to some grumpy ass who tries to rip me off.
        Meritocracy mate. Meritocracy will fix your complaints of injustice and cause you to up your game.
        BTW I also was a smart one who opted out, you have to choose, be a sociopath or be better.

  11. Women are naturally oppressed by the patriarchy, which is why they need special protection and advantages, you retrograde misogynists.

    1. Good women of character and values never need the protection of a man. The SJW crowd you likely associate with have shifting values and egos the size of whales. They are fanatics that seek to destroy the foundations of morality and ethics that placed them in this world. They, like religious fundamentalist, seek to impose their morality on everyone, yet have none themselves. They preach tolerance but don’t practice it. If your whole identity is wrapped around being a victim and having an enemy, then who are you? I suspect you’re young. Time will change your views and experiences regardless of what you think. Have fun.
      Here is one thing I have learned. The organization you trust most will fuck you the hardest. In that world of quicksand rules and chasing the next crises you could be their adversary. Never forget Stalin murdered his strongest supporters, simply because he could. They were bewildered why they were arrested. Its all about power with no rules or consequence.
      Good luck in your future endeavors.

    1. Them: You’re an elitist!
      Me: No. Elitism is a philosophical position and I am an empiricist. I am an elite, because I can prove it.

      1. Them: You’re an elitist!
        Me: That’s nice. But on second thought, make that a double espresso, please.

        1. That’s the one I’ve assigned to “misogynist.”
          But I test for arsenic before I drink it.

  12. You can thank the globalists and politicians for creating this society of mediocrity. Lower wages for shit quality work. Theres no market competition if service and products suck all across the board. Companies make higher profits form employing lower skilled human drones than people that are good at what they do and get paid for those talents.

    1. Companies make higher profits form employing lower skilled human drones than people that are good at what they do and get paid for those talents.
      but that is low-skilled work that doesn’t require smart people to do. Why should any company waste money on overqualified people? Companies do have uses for talented people, and they are often paid well, especially in STEM fields and or where there is a shortage of a specific skill.

  13. Two things need to happen A) affirmative action needs to be done away with B) the term success needs to be redefined. I’m a black woman and am dare I say against AA especially in the medical field EVERYONE needs to be held to the same standards and if you don’t meet them o well. Qualified doctors who have my life their hands trumps diversity for me. The term success needs to be redefined ASAP. Success is getting a degree and getting a comfy career to work until you retire. Nothing is wrong with that plan but that doesn’t appeal to everyone. Growing up this was shoved down my throat without really any other options. I didn’t even know that you could be a SAHM until I was an adult. I think feminists envy men and how important they have been to our society. They envy the positions that men for the most have usually held and how we would look to them as they led our society. Which is why I feel they have heavily pushed this idea to women that having a career is a must and that it should be pursued over all else. Feminist want to be able to say “look at ALL the things we women have accomplished we are getting more degrees than men out earning men and god forbid Hilary is elected we even run the country better than men we are clearly better than men all we had to do was be set free from the kitchen” Personally I’d much rather have never been “set free” from the kitchen. I’m not a stupid person but school work (esp math) never interested me as much as it did for other students. When I was going into high school I was put in all honors classes even though I didn’t have the grades for it. I always would say I’m smart just not on paper and they surprisingly agreed. If I could back to the fifties I would in a heart beat so that I could just graduate high school and start a family. I use to want to be a pediatrician not because a love of medicine but for a love a children. Success needs to be redefined in the sense that true success is finding your passion and living a life that makes you happy and living life on your own terms.

    1. One thing you can do is state your opinion to your girl friends. Maybe they’ll start coming to their senses..
      On a different note, the bad news is Hilary will be the next President.

      1. My friends all fall into the “I am woman hear me roar” “I’m a strong independent woman and don’t need a man for anything” category. Are all in hot pursuits of a degree and or excelling in the o so important customer service sphere. Which I completely support I just don’t value those things as much as they do. We’re all still pretty young I’m 21 so they have plenty of time to come to their senses. Hilary is overrated she doesn’t have nearly as many supporters as the MSM likes to portray.

        1. You are so young and yet so far ahead in your thinking. Please stay that way, and you will have a very happy life with the good man that will certainly find you.
          Your friends will realize later (when it’s gonna be too late) – men don’t care about their degrees. To the contrary, it’s a turn off especially when that’s the only thing they rest their value on.
          As for Hilary, all you have to do is watch the feminist hysteria out there and put the two together. It’s a concerted effort although few realize it.

        2. “We’re all still pretty young I’m 21 so they have plenty of time to come to their senses.”
          No. No you do not. This is the seminal lie that both reliable contraception and feminism feed women: that just because they can choose when to get pregnant also means they can choose when they will marry a man who ticks all the boxes they would have demanded he ticked in their 20s.
          The 20s blitz by a lot faster than you think.

        3. I know this I was just pointing out the age range of my friends. Like I stated in my original comment I wish I grew up in the 50s where most girls could graduate high school and start their families soon after without being labeled failures. My friends are the ones who are saying they won’t even consider serious dating until they are at least 30. There are young they do indeed have time to come to their senses, I’m already there IMHO.

        4. I hope to find a good man to build a nice life with. I grew up in a chaotic and untrusting home. I always swore to myself that I wouldn’t repeat that when I became an adult. To me the most beautiful thing is a strong intact family who value each other. At the end of the day nothing is really permanent friends could turn on you, that high six-figure paying job you have could be swept out from under you, all your possessions even your home could be taken from you. If married people invest in each other and then truly invest in their children, instead of shipping them out to a daycare before their umbilical cord even falls off, they would create a family unit that can whether all the above and more. It’s more important to me to dedicate my life to a husband and children versus a boss who could care less about my existence.

        5. Unsolicited advice. Date through 4 seasons. Get to know the person in that time frame. Never rush. Wait, watch. Opposites attract is complete bullshit. Never let yourself be taken in by looks but by actions. Let a man be a man and he’ll respect you for it. Most men, including myself, cannot be all things to a woman. Don’t overtly criticize or nag him. Nagging destroys any interest and will completely shut down communication. We hate long winded conversations. If it takes 20 minutes to tell a 5 minute story it becomes irritating. I say this only because I have learned these lessons and I have a daughter.
          Being from a family with exceptionally destructive traits, those patterns can affect you later in life. If you had a shitty father don’t find one like him. If your mother was an asshole learn from her mistakes, don’t repeat them. Don’t look for spouses in a bar, you’ll lose them in bar. I too wanted a family and swore I wouldn’t repeat it. I did once because you have to be aware 1) you are capable of doing so yourself 2) You may be desensitized to crazy and overlook some key indications. In my case I found a incredibly attractive woman that was dumber than a box of rocks. Men and woman both make these mistakes.
          If you don’t agree with anything I’ve said, keep the 4 season rule. The biggest freaks are the nicest people in the world for 6 months. When the veneer cracks and your married, it can be hell on Earth. The veneer always cracks. Most wackos can’t last more than 6 months, because it takes too much energy to maintain,

        6. Thanks =] will keep all these in mind when I actually begin husband hunting.

        7. ”My friends all fall into the “I am woman hear me roar” “I’m a strong
          independent woman and don’t need a man for anything” category.”
          You will realize we are all interdependent to some degree when you see men in construction sites, operating machines inventing things, piloting ships working the oil rig etc.
          If indeed your Friends are truly independent they could just strip themselves of everything they have(including clothing) go into the wilderness and start from scratch.
          They could just look at all things built. And be reminded that it is men that built it all.

        8. I live in rural mountain Mexico. I teach free English classes. My students are mostly girls. I miss no chance to square them away before TV and feminist teachers do.
          There were two 13 year old girls in one class. I asked them one day what men do. They had no idea what I was asking them.
          So, I told them men make the universe you live in. They build the buildings; the roads; the streets; the hospitals; the houses; the factories; the electrical system; the Internet system.
          Then I asked them what do women do. Again they had no idea how to answer that question and they looked sad. I told them, “Women make every human being in that universe built by men. There would be no human beings without women.”
          Those two girls were so happy. They just beamed. They almost got so excited I expected them to jump up and down. They acted like they understood that making humans is an important job.
          I sometimes wonder if women try to compete with men because they have been brainwashed to believe that making all the humans in existence is not an important job.

        9. Honestly, you ought to do some travelling if you’re able. Go check out the guys and girls around the world. I have no idea how you look but it doesn’t matter really. The takeaway will be the same; You will see that the women around the world have American women beat and it’s a freaking blowout. Then you will see the men; in Africa, Asia, Latin America. Poor, brutal, often obnoxiously unsophisticated, spoiled. Then you need to come home and you’ll have a new perspective on some decent American guy who makes 90k a year, works out, reads and treats you well. After travelling, you’ll understand that this guy is a one-percenter internationally without knowing it. I don’t mean financially but in sexual market value. Be happy with that guy and don’t let your hypergamy f’up your kids lives like 80% of women are currently doing. Understand that the average American guy has you seriously outranked on an international scale, even if you’re an 8 in America. Just admit it. Don’t tell your husband but just know that. If you’re an 8 in America, you’re a 5 internationally. An employed American male who isn’t an abusive alcoholic and is in shape is a 9 internationally. You’re lucky. And you can easily build a good life with someone who outclasses you. All you have to do is not be a total cunt and appreciate your luck and your husband’s willingness to lay down his life and work for you.

  14. Equalism (defn.): The lazy fucks at the bottom of the ladder looking enviously up at the hard-working fucks at the top of the ladder, sawing the bottom off to put it at the top – then wondering why the fucking ladder falls over.
    Merit is decided the old way: by the acceptance and comradeship of others who also have done the work over time to gain merit.

  15. Feminism was originally about equalizing opportunity, now it has become about equalizing outcomes. Feminism is one of the great lies of human history.

    1. Its failure to take into account male and female nature assuming both to be blank slates and “Equal” that caused it to fail.

    2. Its failure to take into account male and female nature assuming both to be blank slates and “Equal” that caused it to fail.

  16. OT: The “Friendly” Atheists didn’t like my comment on:
    Disciples of the New Dawn, a “Godly” Group Whose Images Are Going Viral Online, is a Parody… So Stop Freaking Out
    Specifically I commented on this:
    Where I wrote:

    Parody or not, the one about contraception states the truth. And contraception has the unexpected side effect of allowing women to reject all the “boring” guys starting in middle school until these women have had their fun with the bad boys, cads, narcissistic sociopaths and other “exciting” men they really prefer. After these women have depleted their bodies through partying and promiscuity and eroded their character, then they turn to the allegedly second rate guys, reluctantly and without enthusiasm, for their “mature” relationships and sexless marriages.
    And notice that these empirical observations about female behavior have nothing to do with the pronouncements of any “holy book” or religious authority figure. We can see this in the here and now, and the social science studies of female promiscuity back this up.

    Keep handing out the Red Pills, guys. Our world view has started to get some traction in public awareness.

      1. Hemant Mehta’s blog publishes ridiculous propaganda about how becoming an atheist just opens up a whole world of sexual fulfillment – but only for formerly christian gays and women, mysteriously.
        Like in this example:
        I keep posting how that doesn’t really work for the typical christian guy who becomes an atheist if he has low sexual market value to begin with.
        And I know a famous example: The atheist Madalyn Murray O’Hair’s younger son, the atheist Jon Garth Murray. Madalyn in her Playboy interview back in the 1960’s says that teens should have the freedom to start having sexual relationships as young as 13 for girls, and 15 for boys.
        So you would think that you would have a blast growing up in the household of such a cool, sex-positive mom. But it didn’t work out that way for Jon. He never moved away from home and he never had a girlfriend, and at the time of his murder in 1995, he apparently died a 40 year old virgin.
        What a letdown. But how many male atheists in practice have to live like sexually abstinent christians because atheism doesn’t make you more bangable?

      2. funny how most atheists got a C- in high school physics, work a shit service job, have tons of debt, yet know the secrets of the universe do not involve a higher power…

        1. I’m an atheist, make 140k/yr, had A+’s in high school, no debt. I’m not a leftist by any measure. Is there a poll that shows all these demographics?

        2. Probably not as they tend to have higher than average IQs. However, the fact that both Rand and Marx were atheists can give you pause about whether it has anything useful to say.

        3. yes means yes. atheist means atheist. wait… what?
          your “atheist” is a-theism from self reliance and self-merit learning of reality. their “atheist” (the one cheeseburga cites) is divine divinity feminist victimist equalist misandry anti-merit. see, to you, atheism is admitting what is factually irrelevant is, in fact, irrelevant, therefore learn self-reliance. but to them, atheism is the crazed -belief- that the monies you have are from theist-driven discrimination, therefore they reject your godly discrimination, therefore they should be given free shit, therefore if they aren’t it’s because of those hateful prejudice theists/marriagists/conservatives. doesn’t matter if they get their belief of you wrong, that’s not their point. their endpoint is they truly believe feels are reality, thus meritful trade and reality fiction, thus they should get free shit. they see you have shit that you “just magically” get and they don’t, they claim theist discrimination is one source of this inequality, they aim to get free shit by invalidating this so called theist discriminatory mystic hate against their personal political persons feels. it doesn’t make sense, but that’s their sensibility, and good luck trying to convince them otherwise, because atheist isn’t the point, theft is the point, theft that they think-feels as earned.
          knowing this, your allegiance to the word atheist should be abandoned, for, in practice, your word has had it’s meaning insidiously subverted away. you are not an atheist any more, not because you’ve changed your meaning, but because atheist now means atheism+/++/+++++++/whatever. i advise you listen to these words, less you let your buttons get pressed again in the near future.

        4. There are quite a few atheists who are both manly and rational and successful. Peter Thiel is one. However, they tends to be small in number compared to the liberal non-holy rollers who controls the media. There are also pagans who are red-pill traditionalists ( building lives on older traditions such as the Norse or Hellenic). The fact is the red-pill men of all walks are fewer in numbers to the sheer numbers of the blue-pill boys. I would welcome any who share desire to affirm our manly virtues.

      3. You guys are mixing up the SJW neckbeard New Atheists with atheism.
        The former is actually a degenerated form of Christian moralfaggotry.
        Im an atheist and I just see it as an obvious reality that doesn’t need to be beaten over anyone’s head.
        Most of us are technically “agnostic” – we are open to the possibility of a god, but theres no reason to take it seriously.
        Its not at all necessary for morality either…in fact, I believe it inhibits morality to only see right and wrong in terms of punishment and reward.

        1. Maybe so, but how would you regard wrong doing without any punishment? What makes society want to punish the wrong doer? Does not all morality and modern law stem from the 10 commandments (thou salt not kill) and later Magna Carta? Morality wasn’t just plucked from the sky.
          I am not saying these rules are right or wrong, but our morality no matter how you frame it has been given down the generations from the Judeo/Christian tradition.

        2. “how would you regard wrong doing without any punishment? ”
          Good question.
          I agree – I don’t think you can define wrong doing without the concept of punishment.
          My point is, the concept of right and wrong, and punishment for wrong doing, are hard wired into our minds (at least among high IQ, civilized people…) from millennia of social, tribal living arrangements.
          If you live in a tribe, and you do something that hurts the others you depend on, say killing, raping, robbing them etc., there will be consequences. You will be punished, and not along the lines of three hots and a cot.
          Over long periods of time, a kind of instinctive understanding of this dynamic takes hold in our psychology. Much like the instincts to hunt, fight, mate, etc.
          Morality is an adaptation to group living.
          Religion just hijacks these instincts in order to control and enslave.
          Pretty ironic, really.

    1. “And notice that these empirical observations about female behavior have
      nothing to do with the pronouncements of any “holy book” or religious
      authority figure. We can see this in the here and now, and the social
      science studies of female promiscuity back this up.”
      The secularist/atheist has to open Pandora’s Box, and study the devastating aftermath, to accept what other men already knew from the “holy book” and common sense.

    2. Once 10% of men discover the red-pill it will wash over the rest of the men.
      But does that really pronounce the dawn of a better era?
      So what if 100% of men go MGTOW or whatever. The government will find some other way to placate the masses and re-distribute wealth. Once MGTOW becomes trendy and gets airtime in Hollywood, we’re going to have to either beat everyone at their own game, vacate the premises, or try to predict the next play.
      Imagine the gov gives handouts to MGTOW because they become a significant proportion of the populace, you really think there wont be a price for those handouts?

      1. The problem is with the “G” because there isn’t anywhere to really go. The USA imposes income tax based on citizenship rather than residence so you can run but you can’t hide.

        1. In this respect it is good that I am from Canada.
          When I heard that about US citizenship I was very surprised. I immediately thought of a totalitarian state.

        2. That’s precisely what it is. You can’t even put money into a foreign account to protect yourself in case of divorce, domestic instability, etc. Anything over a few thousand in a foreign account and it is REQUIRED to be reported to the Feds. Many banks stopped accepting American customers after this law (FATCA).

  17. Where this lack of meritocracy is affecting us most is in the government. Though the public sector doesn’t attract as many bright individuals as private does, the decline has been steep in recent years. This is due to under qualified women being promoted to positions they can’t handle, for the sake of parity. Feminist politicking is behind this.
    The most glaring example of this incompetence has been with the Secret Service. Every week there’s a new story highlighting their incompetence. Last week there was the story of two drunk agents, Obama security detail famously banged Colombian honeypots. Overseeing this was a sloppy overweight woman who got fired thankfully.

    1. Steve Sailer recently wrote on Taki about how the U.S. Government has restored g-loaded testing for civil service jobs. Jimmy Carter abolished them on his way out in 1981, and the abolition opened the doors to randomly unintelligent people winding up with important positions. Bringing this kind of IQ-ish testing back could have the effect of getting somewhat smarter people into the government.

  18. In the expanse of human history there has only ever been one period of meritocracy – hunter gatherer civilizations. The idea that once upon a time society was meritocratic before the leftists took power is absurd. History is filled with bumbling elites and concentrated little cliques of corrupt power who maintained their position through force – not merit.
    What would a meritocracy even look like in modern society? I can almost guarantee that about 80% of the rightwing ROK readership would HATE a true meritocracy.

    1. What would it look like? You posed the question and didn’t answer it. If you don’t know what it would be like how can you “almost guarantee” that “about 80% of right wing ROK readership would hate true meritocracy?”

    2. Yeah we’re all part of Hillary’s right wing conspiracy. ROK and the manosphere in general isn’t about any of the wings that typify the poisonous alchemy of today’s culture and politics.

  19. Meritocracy can and should be used by organizations to reward the most ‘effective’ members. However, this concept can’t be applied to a society, since it’s impossible to define merit (and the reward) where there is no limited scope. The only rational idea is to reward those who produce more value, independently of the way they do it. This is how a completely free market works.
    Be aware: the thought, for example, that contemporary music is shit and current celebrities are making money producing garbage is entirely subjetive, because a lot of people think it’s valuable. The only mode to ‘correct’ it is through education.

  20. Plenty of good sense in this one.
    The example of Abel and Cain is apt, and still very much evident in our times. God is strictly meritocratic — we are saved by Christ but judged (and rewarded or punished) based on our own works.
    Additionally, Cain offered God a sacrifice representative of settled civilization (essentially feminine) while Abel’s offering represented rugged pastoral nomadism, generally masculine and patriarchal. Cain’s offering was rejected, and instead of changing or improving, he murdered his brother and better.
    So apparently, God knew what he was doing.

  21. This is good stuff. Ive made my own similar statements eleswhere about meritocracy and bad leaders, on a feminist site, reframing the issue this way help people to stop complaining and start looking for practical solutions.
    So I hope you’ll understand my intent here;
    In a true meritocracy, a woman would get the job she deserves and not find that her career is inhibited by regularly being ignored, interrupted and insulted by people who assume and need to competitvely reinforce, that she has nothing to contribute.
    A true meritocracy allows for having the people with the best aptitude in each job.
    Thats literally as far as my feminism goes, but I think you could double your support for a push for a meritocracy if you reduced the anti feminist part as it takes away from an otherwise very strong point and implies a hidden agenda that will just cause fights.
    There are some idiot women out there as well as some idiot men, but Ive always belived that sexism is just one of many excuses a beta-hole will use to leverage an advantage, You might inspire their support with the anti feminist part but encouraging their personal growth by setting their own improvement targets would produce the same desired result of a meritocricy.
    Feminists didnt cause the prevalence of dumb women in the work place, sexism reduced smart women down to average, and saddo bosses who promote bimbos and sack smart ugly girls. Women making excuses by using sexism to explain the mediocrity is bad for everyone, but the pervasive incidiousness of casual hate of other groups is the real problem. Ive realised that sexism is only a tool used by insecure betas trying to stay away from the bottom of the pile by relying on mannish group-think to protect them. True alphas have no need to be sexist, racist, competitive or play favourites or bully any other group, they get on with the job, and betas copy what they do or find an excuse when they fail.
    Collectivism is bad. Being forced to go along with a role that doest fit is bad. I hate having to change to fit some stereotype people expect I should be and I hate being bullied and gossiped about by those cliquey creatures who are covering their lame asses. These unmeritocritous clique whores are both men and women, and young men changing themselves to fit an immature clique and curry favour with a false alpha are undermining the possibility of a meritocracy.
    ( please forgive my biased description, I work in an extremely biased workpkace, *all* clique whores who support fake heirachies are disappointing to me, I just only saw it previously by girls at high school and the occasional sociopathic office bitch, who hadn’t grown up, I understand now that the clique system is prevalent in all types of idiot)
    You have a really fantastic idea here which can be a red pill cause that gets the group a better reputation than it currently has. It can be something that is gender blind and wants to eliminate the bullshit by a controlling minority. Its a good thing that also would ensure only the skilled women have skilled jobs, thus removing the cause of beta bitterness in the workplace, but you have to let women have a fair go, and distribute the criticism evenly. And you can let them start with fighting together with you on this cause for a genuine meritocricy.
    After that, may the best person win the biggest share of company bonus.

    1. Gets the group a better reputation than it has? We are men here, and in English speaking societies, men have a bad reputation no matter what they do.
      Also, in a true meritocracy most hard and high paying jobs are going to be filled by men. And it won’t be sexism. Women are grouped much closer to the mean than men are. Which means the smartest people and the dumbest people will always be men.
      Anything that pays good enough to attract the best people, regardless of sex, will in the long term be mostly men.
      That is without even mentioning the fact that women voluntarily quit their jobs at around the 2.5 year point. For men it is nearer 10 years. That is the historical reason women performed worse than men in the job market.
      In the USA, there are certain careers capable of paying well which have an entry exam. Examples are CPA; patent agent, and maybe actuary. Passing scores tend to be 70. Traditionally those who score in the high 90’s were publicly celebrated, and received the best starting pay offers.
      Since they were nearly always men, it is now illegal to disclose the passing scores. If you don’t understand that means the woman who got a 71 on the test will almost always get a higher starting pay than the man who got a 98, I have some good farm land for sale. Meet me at the docks.
      Actually, the man who got a 98 may not even be able to get a job.

      1. Looks to me women have been getting a pretty bad rep from men for a good while too. Dont confuse reality with the frequency of whining complainers blaming the opposit sex for their problems.
        The question is Why do women voluntarily quit their jobs at 2.5 years? Why are the only women at the top ballbreaking bitches?
        Some have kids and leave, but they werent all at the top skill level. I have other more relevant reasons for contributing to that statistic, but if Im treated from the start as if Im going to leave because of an assumption or a stat, I wont be given enjoyable challenging work that is appropriate to my skills, the company loses from this assumption the most. But thats not even why I leave after 2 years either, thats just standard noise that comes with all jobs and results in slightly lower pay for a slower career, which I dont gripe about.
        Noone has ever been correct in telling me why I was leaving a job, they always reframe it to fit their pre existing ideas. Its quite interesting that each time I leave I am told why by a few people and no one even asks why. Very fishy. They know why, or they are happy with the unmeritocritous advantage it gives them and dont want to know.
        All of the real reasons disappear in a meritocracy where people trust in their employer, their colleagues and their own skills.
        The real truth is, the majority of weak people would do worse in a meritocricy free of office politics, workshy timewasters and competitve bullshit. If youre OK with a true meroticracy its because you are good at your job.
        What is the distribution for that statistic? After factoring out the young married mothers to be who are not doing carrer work already, you have highly skilled women who stay for 10 years like men, and you have a lot of early bails and failures, for many many more reasons that are covered by the equal rights and dignity issues which should be fixed if a company wants to be truly profitable.
        I dont know if your example is accurate, I dont plan on criticising it, but why cant the starting salary be proprtional to the test score? The UK patent office pay scheme and promotions works based on actual output. They do the whole thing on merit, you dont even have to wait for someone to leave to get a grade change.
        Personally I dont care for tokenism, the sooner my colleagues accept we all have the job based on merit and Im a 98, ( Im happy for them to announce and credit me for this), the sooner we can all get on with the job and cooperate to increase the money in the bonus pot.
        The current state of there being more men at the top of the pile is irrelevant, if you think more men are inherently smarter, I dont care, the issue to women who do not fall into your feminazi category, is that the 70-90 scoring women are often treated and paid like 70s while the 70 men get promoted for having a bromance with the boss, who prefers less threatening suckers around him agreeing with everything he says. Youll find real women are happy to accept a meritocracy just as many men are who dont get promoted because their boss is a ego maniacal dick who is too easily influenced by a bit of brown nosing.
        The discussion of a meritocracy really has nothing to do with gender. My mention of the reputation of sites like this is to encourage you to not bring gender an argument where its not relevant. Its as bad as what you accuse feminists of doing.
        Talk more sense framed as a nice example of what intelligent rational mature men supposedly do, and more people will listen, and maybe take your less sensible ideas on board.
        There are practical ways of advancing a meritocracy and equality of opportunity, which if you are right about men being inherently smarter, then, and only then can you quote stats for as proof of it.

  22. Leftists actually love a “meritocracy” as long as they define what constitutes merit, and that is inevitably a system of subjective standards that leftists happen to agree with. The academy is the worst for this. Leftist professors give you 6/10 on your exam essay: who are you to argue? It’s not like they can explain what you did wrong, how it could be improved, and why the leftist student got 8.5 even though the exact same criticisms would otherwise apply. Teams of professors band together to decide who enters graduate programs and even if you have your PhD they will blackball you from tenure (but some have fought back ). And if you follow Climategate they try to “hide the decline” and rig the peer review system so that only the leftists can be published. That’s the way they define merit: to promote their own.
    On the other hand, any objective standards that are clear but don’t get the political results desired are tossed out (standardized tests, physical fitness tests, years of experience – for nominating judges for instance).
    The biggest problem is that there are now at least two definitions of “equality”, and the left and right have grabbed on to two each and trying to win the day on semantics. The left is largely winning in any field that the government can get its hands on.
    First is the equality of humanity by virtue of being human. Everyone is deserving of certain essential dignities. Second is equality of opportunity, which is related to the first. Everyone should have the same shot at reaching their potential, making a million dollars, or becoming the leader of their country, but the actual accomplishments need to be earned.
    Turning left, you basically have equality of outcome. Not enough of one gender or race in the top tier jobs? Boohoo: lets rig the system to get that outcome. It basically ghettoizes these sorts of positions. You put the people on different scales and yet have the audacity to call it equality. If the government mandated that universities must graduate an equal number of male and female engineers, who would you trust to build your bridge?
    The last is “substantive equality” which masquerades as equality of opportunity but in practice is just a clever way to enforce equality of outcome. It either involves “treating people differently to treat them the same” or simply throwing out objective standards for political reasons. Now, the latter is not always a bad thing, such as having to correctly match the names and faces of half a dozen NASCAR drivers in order to vote. Distinguish that from a 90 pound woman who wants to be a firefighter and simply can’t carry a 200 pound person to safety.
    Law school teaches you at least two oxymorons: legal reasoning, and feminist thought. All the confusion over a simple word such as “equality” is the result of these.

  23. Take a look at this. FUCKING mangina telling men not to hit women no matter what.

    This shit has got to stop. Please share with the hashtag #itstartswithus
    Posted by Mario Mohorko on Friday, April 10, 2015

    Honestly, these men who do this, beta bitch manginas, are absolute fools.

    1. “30 women have been murdered…” by men who were angry at them? Or just because they were victims of crimes? WTF.

  24. Meritocracy is the most liberal and equalist because an objective metric doesn’t care about whether you are black, white, Jewish, Muslim, male, female, gay or straight.
    In the US one important aspect would making it anonymous so that they cannot tell if you have an ethnically distinct name such as Feldstein or Lopez. True right wingers would probably be against such a revolutionary principle because then the ‘wrong people’ would get in.
    As a leftist, I support meritocracy. So should any feminist, or racial equality advocate. For all those saying before 1965 was the golden era. Before 1965, a qualified black, indigenous or Jewish man did not live in a meritocracy because of de jure discrimination. Please stop saying that color blindness and affirmative action are the same thing. Color blindness is legit, affirmative action is something else.

  25. A great read on the subject is “Screwtape Proposes a Toast” by C.S. Lewis. He was writing about this problem even that far back.

  26. Communism was built on the notion of destroying the meritocracy. And look how that turned out. As with the Stalinists and Maoists, in their scramble for an “equality Utopia” by pushing everyone down to the lowest common denominator, the only thing modern cultural Marxists will usher in will be an Idiocracy. (Great movie BTW, I definitely recommend a viewing.)

  27. There’s one small problem though. What happens when we find those women & girls who are EQUALLY smart, intelligent, logical, meritorious, etc, to their male counterparts? What happens when these kinds of women are hired over & paid more than EQUALLY meritorious male employees? What happens when we find many women & girls who are MORE skilled & meritorious than their male counterparts? I’m VEHEMENTLY AGAINST discrimination of innocent men & boys of this world, but at the same time, I’m wise enough to acknowledge that there ARE LOTS & LOTS of smart & strong women & girls in areas of STEM, sports, athletics, finances, managements, business, leaderships, and so on. I’ve ALSO seen lots of intelligent women with EXTREMELY high levels of mathematical & science skills, verbal communication abilities, emotional & cognitive reasoning, memory & multitasking abilities, geeks & nerds, brilliant ones, & so on.
    What I personally believe, is that if equality of outcome is necessary, then 50% of almost ALL positions of jobs, college seats, careers, etc, should be reserved for MERITORIOUS & SKILLED women & men. In this way, ALL people are empowered, IN PARALLEL, and at the same time.

  28. Whats all this talk of leaving the U.S.A….God Damn it we are men. Lets act like it. We take back our country, we create social pressure for our women to act right. We lead them not run away like cowards.If you leave you further this globalist bullshit and make it worse. We are men, we set the standards they follow period. If they dont we ship women from other countries here and show them what women are supposed to be. Fuck cowardly behavior like this.

  29. LOL…you are starting to get there. Keep it up.
    trumpski does not represent merit. Clinton does. Let Clinton be born to a daddy with $300,000,000 and she won’t represent merit either.

Comments are closed.