Utilizator:D 1010011010/Test2

Meritocracy, in the first, most administrative sense, is a system of government or other administration (such as business administration) wherein appointments and responsibilities are objectively assigned to individuals based upon their "merits", namely intelligence, credentials, and education, determined through evaluations or examinations. The "most common definition of meritocracy conceptualizes merit in terms of tested competency and ability, and most likely as measured by IQ or standardized achievement tests." Supporters of meritocracies do not necessarily agree on the nature of "merit", however they tend to agree that "merit" itself should be a primary consideration during evaluation.

In a more general sense, meritocracy can refer to any form of government based on achievement. Like "utilitarian" and "pragmatic", the word "meritocratic" has also developed a broader definition, and can be used to refer to any government run by "a ruling or influential class of educated or able people." This is in contrast to the term originally coined by Michael Young in 1958, who critically defined it as a system where "merit is equated with intelligence-plus-effort, its possessors are identified at an early age and selected for appropriate intensive education, and there is an obsession with quantification, test-scoring, and qualifications." Meritocracy in its wider sense can be any general act of judgment upon the basis of people's various demonstrated merits; such acts are frequently described in sociology and psychology. Thus, the merits may extend beyond intelligence and education to any mental or physical talent or to work ethic. In rhetoric, the demonstration of one's merit regarding mastery of a particular subject is an essential task most directly related to the Aristotelian term Ethos. The equivalent Aristotelian conception of meritocracy is based upon aristocratic or oligarchical structures rather than in the context of the modern state.

Although meritocracy as a term is a relatively recent invention, the concept of a government based on standardized examinations originates from the works of Confucius, along with other Legalist and Confucian philosophers. The first meritocracy was implemented in the 2nd century BC, by the Han Dynasty, which introduced the world's first civil service exams evaluating the "merit" of officials. Meritocracy as a concept spread from China to British India during the 17th century, and then into continental Europe and the United States. With the translation of Confucian texts during the Enlightenment, the concept of a meritocracy reached intellectuals in the West, who saw it as an alternative to the traditional ancient regime of Europe. In the United States, the assassination of President Garfield in 1881 prompted the replacement of the American Spoils System with a meritocracy. In 1883, The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act was passed, stipulating government jobs should be awarded on the basis of merit through competitive exams, rather than ties to politicians or political affiliation.

The most common form of meritocratic screening found today is the college degree. Higher education is an imperfect meritocratic screening system for various reasons, such as lack of uniform standards worldwide, lack of scope (not all occupations and processes are included), and lack of access (some talented people never have an opportunity to participate because of the expense, most especially in developing countries). However, academic degrees serve some amount of meritocratic screening purpose in the absence of more refined methodology. Education alone, however, does not constitute a complete system, as meritocracy must automatically confer power and authority, which a degree independently does not accomplish.

Etymology

Although the concept has existed for centuries, the term meritocracy was first coined by British politician and sociologist, Michael Young in his 1958 satirical essay, "The Rise of the Meritocracy", which pictured the United Kingdom under the rule of a government favoring intelligence and aptitude (merit) above all. The essay is written in the first-person by a fictional historical narrator in 2034, and interweaves history from the politics of pre- and post-war Britain with those of fictional future events in the short (1960 onward) and long term (2020 onward).

The essay was based upon the tendency of the then-current governments in their striving towards intelligence to ignore shortcomings and upon the failure of education systems to correctly utilize gifted and talented members within their societies.

Young's fictional narrator explains that, on the one hand, the greatest contributor to society is not the "stolid mass" or majority, but the "creative minority" or "restless elite". On the other hand, he claims that there are casualties of progress whose influence is underestimated and that, from such stolid adherence to natural science and intelligence, arises arrogance and complacency. This problem is encapsulated in the phrase "Every selection of one is a rejection of many".

History of the concept

According to scholarly consensus, the earliest example of an administrative meritocracy, based on civil service examinations, dates back to Ancient China.^a[›] The concept originates at least by the 6th century BC, when it was advocated by the Chinese philosopher Confucius, who "invented the notion that those who govern should do so because of merit, not of inherited status. This sets in motion the creation of the imperial examinations and bureaucracies open only to those who passed tests." As the Qin and Han dynasties developed a meritocratic system in order to maintain power over a large, sprawling empire, it became necessary for the government to maintain a complex network of officials. Prospective officials could come from a rural background and government positions were not restricted to the nobility. Rank was determined by merit, through the civil service examinations, and education became the key for social mobility. After the fall of the Han Dynasty, the nine-rank system was established during the Three Kingdoms period.

According to the Princeton Encyclopedia on American History:

„One of the oldest examples of a merit-based civil service system existed in the imperial bureaucracy of China. Tracing back to 200 B.C., the Han Dynasty adopted Confucianism as the basis of its political philosophy and structure, which included the revolutionary idea of replacing nobility of blood with one of virtue and honesty, and thereby calling for administrative appointments to be based solely on merit. This system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer, a position that would bring wealth and honor to the whole family. In part due to Chinese influence, the first European civil service did not originate in Europe, but rather in India by the British-run East India Company... company managers hired and promoted employees based on competitive examinations in order to prevent corruption and favoritism.”

The concept of meritocracy spread from China to British India during the 17th century, and then into continental Europe and the United States. With the translation of Confucian texts during the Enlightenment, the concept of a meritocracy reached intellectuals in the West, who saw it as an alternative to the traditional ancient regime of Europe. Voltaire and François Quesnay wrote favourably of the idea, with Voltaire claiming that the Chinese had "perfected moral science" and Quesnay advocating an economic and political system modeled after that of the Chinese.

The first European power to successfully implement a meritocratic civil service was the British Empire, in their administration of India: "company managers hired and promoted employees based on competitive examinations in order to prevent corruption and favoritism." British colonial administrators advocated the spread of the system to the rest of the Commonwealth, the most "persistent" of which was Thomas Taylor Meadows, Britain's consul in Guangzhou, China. This practice was later adopted in the late 19th century by the British mainland, inspired by "Chinese mandarin system."

In the United States, the United States Civil Service utilized the Spoils System from 1828 until the assassination of United States President Garfield by a disappointed office seeker in 1881 proved its dangers. Two years later in 1883, the system of appointments to the United States Federal Bureaucracy was revamped by the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act, partially based on the British meritocratic civil service that had been established years earlier. The act stipulated that government jobs should be awarded on the basis of merit, through competitive exams, rather than ties to politicians or political affiliation. It also made it illegal to fire or demote government employees for political reasons. To enforce the merit system and the judicial system, the law also created the United States Civil Service Commission. In the modern American meritocracy, the president can only hand out a certain number of jobs which must be approved by the Senate.

Social Darwinism

Articol principal: Social Darwinism.

Social Darwinism is a social theory which holds that Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection is a model, not only for the development of biological traits in a population, but also as an application for human social institutions — the existing social institutions being implicitly declared as normative. Social Darwinism was at its most popular from the late 19th century to the end of World War II. Proponents of Social Darwinism argue that the theory justifies social inequality as being meritocratic. Darwin himself only ventured to propound his theories in a biological sense, and it is other thinkers and theorists who have applied Darwin's model to unequal endowments of human ambition.

Historical examples

fff

Confucianism

In teaching, there should be no distinction of classes. (Analects XV, 39)

The main basis of his teachings was to seek knowledge, study, and become a better person.

Although Confucius claimed that he never invented anything but was only transmitting ancient knowledge (see Analects VII, 1), he did produce a number of new ideas. Many European and American admirers such as Voltaire and H. G. Creel point to the revolutionary idea of replacing nobility of blood with nobility of virtue. Jūnzǐ (君子, lit. "lord's child"), which originally signified the younger, non-inheriting, offspring of a noble, became, in Confucius' work, an epithet having much the same meaning and evolution as the English "gentleman". A virtuous plebeian who cultivates his qualities can be a "gentleman", while a shameless son of the king is only a "small man". That he admitted students of different classes as disciples is a clear demonstration that he fought against the feudal structures that defined pre-imperial Chinese society.

This new idea, of the meritocracy, led to the introduction of the Imperial examination system in China. The system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer, a position which would bring wealth and honour to the whole family. The Chinese Imperial examination system seem started in 165 BC, when certain candidates for public office were called to the Chinese capital for examination of their moral excellence by the emperor. Over the following centuries the system grew until finally almost anyone who wished to become an official had to prove his worth by passing written government examinations.

Han Feizi

In addition to Confucius, another ancient Chinese philosopher of the same period (that of the Warring States) advocated a meritocratic system of government and society. This was Han Feizi who was famous as the foremost proponent of the School of Law, otherwise known as the philosophy of Legalism. This had, as its central tenet, the absolute rule of law, but also contained numerous meritocratic elements. Another Legalist, Shang Yang implemented Legalist and meritocratic reforms in the state of Qin by abolishing the aristocracy and promoting individuals based on their skill, intelligence, and initiative.

This led to the armies of the Qin gaining a critical edge over the other nations that adhered to old aristocratic systems of government. Legalism, along with its pro-meritocratic ideals, remained a key part of Chinese philosophy and politics for another two millennia, although after the Qin Dynasty it was heavily diluted. But meritocratic governance within the bureaucracy remains a key stone of Chinese government all the way to the present. This can be most clearly seen in the use of standardized "imperial examinations" to determine entry into the official class, which began in the Sui Dynasty.

British India

Under Chinese influence, the first European power to successfully implement a merit-based civil system was the British Empire, in their administration of India. To avoid corruption, "company managers hired and promoted employees based on competitive examinations in order to prevent corruption and favoritism."

Napoleon

Napoleonic (Revolutionary) France is considered to have been meritocratic. After the revolution of 1789 most members of the former elite had been removed. When Napoleon rose to power in 1799, there was no ancient base from which to draw his staff, and he had to choose the people he thought best for the job, including officers from his army, revolutionaries who had been in the National Assembly, and even some former aristocrats such as prime minister Talleyrand. This policy was summed up in Bonaparte's often-quoted phrase "La carrière ouverte aux talents", careers open to the talented, or as more freely translated by Thomas Carlyle, "the tools to him that can handle them". A clear example is the order of the Légion d'honneur, the first order of merit, admitting men of any class. They were judged not by ancestry or wealth but by military, scientific or artistic prowess. Napoleon was known for saying 'jobs open for talent'.

Modern meritocratic states

Singapore

Singapore describes meritocracy as one of its official guiding principles for domestic public policy formulation, placing emphasis on academic credentials as objective measures of merit. It separated from Malaysia in 1965 after the federal Malaysian government insisted on giving special privileges to the Malays as part of their "birthright" as an "indigenous" people (the majority, 76%, of the island's population are Chinese). Political leaders in Singapore argued instead for the equality of all citizens, with places in universities, government contracts, political appointments, etc., going to the most deserving candidates, rather than to those chosen on the basis of connections or ethnic background (It is worth noting that Lee Kuan Yew was originally a Fabian Socialist and opposed racism). This dispute between State and Federal governments proved irreconcilable; Singapore therefore became an independent city-state separate from Malaysia.

There is criticism that, under this system, Singaporean society is being increasingly stratified and that an elite class is being created from a narrow segment of the population. Although most agree that Singapore's economic success has been due in part to its strong emphasis on developing and promoting talented leaders, there are signs that an increasing number believe that it is instead becoming an elitist society. Defendants recall the ancient Chinese proverb 'Wealth does not pass three generations', suggesting that the nepotism or cronyism of elitists will eventually be, and often are, replaced by those lower down the hierarchy. Indeed, many top political leaders in Singapore come from peasant backgrounds, while modern peasants boast about their great ancestry.

Modern meritocratic movements

OSHO

In the mid-eighties, the controversial spiritual teacher Osho suggested that both Democracy and Communism should be replaced by Meritocracy, as an overarching political system. According to Osho, only persons with appropriate qualifications should be allowed to vote. Moreover, all politicians should have appropriate college or university degrees. Only the geniuses of the world should govern. Osho suggested that first the various nations should become meritocracies, after which they can all be joined to form a global meritocracy.

The Meritocracy Party

In 2007 an anonymous group called The Meritocracy Party published its first manifesto, to which they have now added more than two million words on the subject (discussing Hegel, Rousseau, Charles Fourier, Henri de Saint-Simon and various other philosophers, scientists, reformers and revolutionaries). In summary, The Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following:

1) A world in which every child gets an equal chance to succeed in life. There should not be elite private schools for the children of the rich, and lower quality public schools for everyone else.
2) The abolishment of party politics. In fact the Meritocracy Party wants to make even itself obsolete. All members of Parliament should be independents, elected for their specific expertise and merit.
3) Only those with a relevant education and work experience should be allowed to vote, rather than just anyone who has reached the age of 18 or 21. There should be citizen exams through which everyone can obtain the right to vote on a certain issue. For example, those who wish to vote for the next Minister of Finance should have a certain diploma which shows they have enough understanding of this field to make an educated vote.
4) The introduction of 100% Inheritance Tax, so that the superrich elite can no longer pass on their wealth to a select few (their privileged children) rather than the Commonwealth. This Inheritance Tax would mean the end of the elite dynasties, and abolish hereditary monarchy.
5) A radically reformed educational system, based on the MBTI personality types, and insights from radical innovators like Rudolf Steiner and Maria Montessori. Revenue coming in from 100% Inheritance Tax should primarily be invested into the educational system, the bedrock of a true Meritocracy.
6) To replace free market capitalism with social capitalism, and to replace Democracy with a fully transparent Meritocratic Republic, under a Meritocratic Constitution.
7) The end of nepotism, cronyism, discrimination, privilege and unequal chances.

On their website the Meritocracy Party lists 5 meritocratic principles and 13 primary aims.

Computing

Meritocracy Online

“ The great thing about the internet is it is a meritocracy and it's free. ” — Damian Kulash, OK Go,

Although formal meritocracies are uncommon online, informal ones are quite prevalent. They often occur in online games such as MMORPGs where the best players are more likely to become guild leaders or be otherwise influential, although the ability to invest large amounts of time and/or money is also important. In discussion forums, it is often assumed that the most knowledgeable users have the best chances of becoming moderators, although online popularity and policy support may be just as important.

Further, due to the nature of online interaction, where identity and anonymity are more readily managed than in direct interaction, the effects of offline social inequity can often be discounted in online communities. Intelligence, effort, education, and personality may be readily conveyed in an online interaction but a person's gender, race, religion, and social standing can be easily obfuscated or left entirely unaddressed.

Open Source

There is a tendency, in the structure of open source projects, for a meritocracy to arise. Technically, the more proficient the developer is in contributing towards the project - developing new features or maintaining existing code - the more they are required or the more the project necessitates their contribution, and thus the more senior their informal position becomes. Those who contribute more code, and have more of an effect on the direction or status of the project, will tend to have more seniority and influence. The Apache Software Foundation and the Mozilla Foundation are examples of (open source) organizations which officially claim to be meritocracies.

Criticism

The primary concern with meritocracy is the unclear definition of "merit" itself. Different people often have their own standards of merit, thus raising the question of which "merit" has the best merits - or in other words, which standard is the "best" standard.

Meritocracy has also been criticized by egalitarians as a mere myth which serves only to justify the status quo, with its proponents only giving lip service to equality. In the words of sociologist Laurie Taylor:

“The hideous thing about meritocracy is it tells you that if you’ve given life your all and haven’t got to the top you’re thick or stupid. Previously, at least, you could always just blame the class system.”

A second concern regards the principle of incompetence, or the "Peter Principle". As people rise in a meritocratic society through the corporate ladder, they reach and are stuck at the first level of what they are unable to do.

Other concerns for the validity of a merit based system have arisen from studies in psychology, sociology and neuroscience. Given the proposition that 'a persons life prospects should not be decided by factors outside of their control or for which a person cannot claim personal credit' (i.e social status, inherited wealth, race and other accidents of birth) a meritocracy proposes a system where people are rewarded based on their efforts, and if everyone can start on equal footing with the same opportunity to advance, then the results are just. However, some studies have shown that even our motivation, work ethic and conscientious drive is in fact outside of our control and can be affected by such arbitrary factors such as birth order. Children who are first in birth order are more likely to be hard working. Therefore, a system which rewards effort in this way is not just, because effort and hard work is not something we can claim credit for.

See also

• Equality of opportunity vs Equality of outcome
• Equality before the law
• Jedem das Seine
• Meritocracy in China
• Merit (Buddhism)

• Structural functionalism
• Differential Education Achievement

References

^ a: This is the history of the meritocracy in the technical sense. The vaguer definition of a meritocracy as a "rule by intelligence" has been applied to many ancient Greek, Indian, Chinese and Jewish thinkers and statesmen. For example, the Sanhedrin, the legislature of Ancient Israel and Kingdom of Judah, is sometimes called as an "intellectual meritocracy", in the sense that its members were drawn from religious scribes and not the aristocracy. However, appointment was self-perpetuating and new members were personally chosen by existing members. These are not meritocracies in the administrative sense, in which merit is determined objectively as a "tested competency or ability."

Notes

• Burbank, Jane and Cooper, Frederick. (2010). Empires in World History: Power and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-12708-5.
• Kazin, Michael, Edwards, Rebecca, and Rothman, Adam. (2010). The Princeton Encyclopedia of American Political History Volume 2. Princeton University Press. ISBN 0-691-12971-1.
• Schwarz, Bill. (1996). The expansion of England: race, ethnicity and cultural history. Psychology Pres. ISBN 0-415-06025-7.

External links

• "Meritocracy and the Erosion of Self-Respect", lecture by Sjalling Swierstra und Evelien H. Tonkens (with a German introduction)
• World Wide Words — Michael Quinion writes about the changing use of the term, as does Progress Online
• "Meritocracy: Beyond Democracy – and Mobocracy!", quotes from Osho on Meritocracy
• "The Meritocracy Party", the manifesto of the international Meritocracy Movement
• "Round Table Meritocracy", English article on meritocracy. Also available in German, Spanish and Dutch.

Categorie:Political philosophy Categorie:Social philosophy Categorie:Liberalism Categorie:Political neologisms Categorie:Affirmative action Categorie:Forms of government Categorie:Sociology index ro:Meritocrație